m 


The   Government   of 
England . 

National,  Local,  and  Imperial 


By 

David  Duncan  Wallace,  Ph.D. 

Professor  of  History  and  Economics  in  Wofford  College 

Author    of    "The  Civil  Government  of   South  Carolina    and    the 
United  States,"  "The  Life  of  Henry  Laurens." 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New  York  and  London 

ttbe  Imicfcerbocfeer  press 

1917 


COPYRIGHT,  1917 

BY 

DAVID  DUNCAN  WALLACE 


3 


Ube  IRniclierbocfter  Tpree0,  Wew  Korli 


CO 

S.  A.  W.f 
HEAD  OF  THE  HOME  DEPARTMENT, 

THIS  LITTLE   BOOK   IS   DEDICATED 
BY 

THE  PERMANENT  UNDERSECRETARY 


372371 


A  land  of  settled  government, 
A  land  of  old  and  just  renown, 
Where  freedom  slowly  broadens  down 

From  precedent  to  precedent. 

Tennyson. 

A  republic  under  the  forms  of  a  monarchy. 

Montesquieu. 


PREFACE 

I  have  attempted  to  describe  the  English  govern- 
ment as  it  is  without  distracting  the  reader  with  a 
long  account  of  how  it  came  to  be  what  it  is.  More- 
over, I  have  avoided  the  common  habit  of  first  de- 
scribing the  government  as  it  is  supposed  to  be  in 
theory  and  then  following  this  with  an  equally  de- 
tailed account  explaining  that  it  is  not  really  this, 
but  something  very  different. 

The  reader  will  observe  too  that  I  have  all  along 
kept  in  mind  the  resemblances  and  contrasts  between 
the  government  of  England  and  that  of  our  own 
country,  not  only  because  of  the  interest  in  such  a 
parallel,  but  because  of  the  practical  lessons  which 
it  supplies. 

I  hope  that  the  book  may  find  a  serviceable  place 
in  college  classes  where  the  time  at  command,  as  is 
frequently  the  case,  is  too  limited  for  an  extended 
treatment  of  so  large  a  subject  as  the  British  govern- 
ment. The  general  reader  desiring  a  brief,  untechni- 
cal  account  of  the  British  government  will  also 
doubtless  find  it  a  convenient  handbook. 


vi  Preface 

I  wish  to  acknowledge  my  obligations  to  President 
Henry  N.  Snyder,  of  Wofford  College,  Professor  J.  A. 
Tillinghast,  of  Converse  College,  Doctor  W.  W.  Car- 
son, of  Depauw  University,  and  Professor  Frank  G. 
Bates,  of  Indiana  University,  for  their  criticism  of 
my  manuscript  and  their  many  helpful  suggestions, 
and  to  my  father  for  his  kindness  in  reading  the 
proof. 

D.  D.  W. 

WOFFORD  COLLEGE,  SPARTANBURG,  S.  C. 
December  30,  igi6. 


CONTENTS 

BOOK  I.     THE  CENTRAL  GOVERNMENT 
PART  I.     THE  LEGISLATURE 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I. — THE  ENGLISH  CONSTITUTION      .         .  3 

II. — PARLIAMENT 18 

*-~  III. — THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  ...  29 

IV. — THE  CABINET  AND  THE  COMMONS        .  42 

V. — ORGANIZATION  AND  WORK  OF  THE 
HOUSE  OF  COMMONS — GOVERN- 
MENT BILLS 57 

VI. — ORGANIZATION  AND  WORK  OF  THE 
HOUSE  OF  COMMONS — PRIVATE  BILLS 
AND  PRIVATE  MEMBER  BILLS  .  67 

VII. — CUSTOMS  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS.       72 

VIII. — THE  HOUSE  OF  LORDS        .         .         .81 

IX. — THE  LORDS  AS  A  LAW-MAKING  BODY  .       89 

PART  II.    THE  EXECUTIVE 

X.— THE  KING 98 

XI. — THE  CABINET 120 

XII. — THE  PRIME  MINISTER        .         .         .     133 
XIII.— THE  TREASURY          .         .         .         .140 

vii 


viii  Contents 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

XIV. — OTHER  EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENTS        .     144 
XV. — THE  PERMANENT  CIVIL  SERVICE          .     157 

PART  III.     THE  JUDICIARY 

^      XVI. — THE  CRIMINAL  COURTS      .         .         .164 
XVII.— THE  CIVIL  COURTS    .         .         .         .187 

XVIII. — MISCELLANEOUS    FACTS    ABOUT    THE 

COURTS 202 

PART  IV.    POLITICS  AND   ELECTIONS 
XIX. — PARTY  ORGANIZATIONS       .         .         .     208 
XX. — ELECTIONS  TO  PARLIAMENT         .         .217 

BOOK  II.    LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

XXI. — CITY  GOVERNMENT    .         .         .  .227 

XXII. — COUNTY  GOVERNMENT        .         .  .     243 

XXIII. — SMALLER  DIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY  .     250 

XXIV. — THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  LONDON    .  .258 

BOOK  III.     EMPIRE  AND  COLONIES 
^\XXV. — COLONIES  AND  MOTHER-COUNTRY       .     267 
^SXXVI. — IRISH  HOME  RULE     .         .         .         .274 

XXVII. — SELF-GOVERNING    COLONIES     AND 

DOMINIONS 281 

XXVIII. —  CROWN  COLONIES     ....     304 
. — INDIA — PROTECTORATES     .         .         .     309 


Contents  ix 

BOOK  IV.    SOCIAL  AND  POLITICAL  CHARACTERISTICS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

XXX.— THE  ESTABLISHED  CHURCH         .         -337 

XXXI.— EDUCATION      .....     349 

XXXII.— ARISTOCRACY  AND  DEMOCRACY    .         .     354 

XXXIII.— LESSONS  ENGLAND  CAN  TEACH  us       .     364 

BIBLIOGRAPHY  .         .         .         .         .     371 

INDEX 373 


TABLES 

PAGE 

DURATION  OF  PARLIAMENTS  SINCE  1837        .         .41 
OFFICIALS  COMPOSING  CABINET  AND  MINISTRY  130 

PRIME  MINISTERS  SINCE  THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE 
GREAT  REFORM  ACT  OF  1832  .         .         .138 

TABLE  OF  THE  COURTS  OF  JUSTICE       .         .         .372 


The  English  Government 


Book  I.     The  Central  Government 

PART  I.    THE  LEGISLATURE 

CHAPTER  I 

THE  ENGLISH  CONSTITUTION 

England's  Contribution  to  Government.  Each 
of  the  great  nations  of  history  is  marked  by  its  own 
peculiar  qualities  and  has  accordingly  made  a  contri- 
bution to  the  world's  civilization  different  from  that 
of  other  nations.  Perhaps  the  most  valuable  of  the 
distinctly  English  contributions  to  modern  civiliza- 
tion is  popular  constitutional  free  government. 
Even  nations  antagonistic  to  the  English  in  other 
respects  have  copied  their  free  institutions  and  practi- 
cal political  principles  to  such  an  extent  that  we  may 
say  that  the  larger  the  degree  of  freedom  which  a 
nation  enjoys,  the  more  closely  will  we  find  that 

3 


4  The  Legislature 

its  government  has  been  modelled  after  that  of 
England. r 

Varieties  of  Government.  Although  practically 
all  modern  free  governments  are  organized  directly 
or  indirectly  in  imitation  of  that  of  England,  they 
are  not  mere  slavish  copies,  but  are  rather  adapta- 
tions to  meet  their  own  specific  conditions,  without 
inconveniencing  themselves  with  unessential  or 
even  undesirable  features  which  would  not  be 
suitable  to  their  circumstances.  Hence  among 
the  self-governing  countries  of  the  world  there 
are  varieties  of  institutions,  differences  of  meth- 
od, and  degrees  of  freedom.  In  order  to  make 
this  clear,  let  us  use  a  diagram,  with  illustrations 
drawn  from  various  countries.  The  governments 
of  the  world  may  be  grouped  in  classes  as  shown 
on  page  5.* 

While  it  might  be  possible  to  place  every  existing 
government  under  some  heading  of  this  table,  we 
must  admit  that  it  would  require  some  forcing;  for 
many  are  in  such  a  stage  of  their  development  as 
not  to  be  decidedly  one  thing  or  the  other.  A  class- 


1  "England  in  the  nineteenth  century  has  served  as  a  political 
model  for  Europe.  The  English  developed  the  political  mechanism 
of  constitutional  monarchy,  parliamentary  government,  and  safe- 
guards for  personal  liberty.  Other  nations  have  only  imitated 
them. " — Seignobos. 

*  Based  on  the  table  in  Leacock's  Elements  of  Political  Science, 

120. 


The  English  Constitution 


ification  to  be  of  any  value  must  be  based  upon  the 
nature  of  the  things  classified.  This  table  seeks  to 
show  what  is  most  characteristic,  and  to  indicate  at 
a  glance,  without  confusing  and  cumbersome  details, 
the  broad  resemblances  and  differences  of  the  various 
governments  of  the  world. 


Modern 

governments 


Absolute 

(Afghanistan) 


Constitutional 


f  Limited 
monarchy 


Centralized 


Federal 


|  Presidential 
(Prussia) 

I  Parliamentary 
I      (England) 


Presidential 
(German 
Empire) 

Parliamentary 
(Canada) 


Republic 


{Presidential 
(Cuba) 
Parliamentary 
(France) 


L  Federal 


Presidential 
I      (United  States) 

I  Parliamentary 
(Switzerland1) 


Absolute  Governments.  Let  us  understand  the 
terms  of  our  table,  beginning  with  the  most  general 
classes  and  going  down  to  the  particular  country. 
First,  an  absolute  government  means  one  in  which 
there  is  a  monarch  (king,  emperor,  czar,  duke,  khan, 
shah,  or  what  not)  whose  will  is  law.  The  acts  of 
the  government  are  done  by  his  command,  and  not 

1  But  note  that,  though  the  Swiss  executive  must  yield  to  the 
will  of  the  Legislature  when  outvoted,  it  does  not  resign,  but  simply 
follows  the  expressed  will  of  the  Legislature. 


6  The  Legislature 

by  the  deliberation  of  the  people  or  their  elected  re- 
presentatives. There  are,  of  course,  many  tribal  or 
national  customs  which  he  is  obliged  to  observe; 
and  also  he  is  liable  to  be  murdered  or  deposed  if  he 
uses  his  authority  with  too  great  disregard  for  the 
rights  and  interests  of  any  influential  element  of  the 
people.  But  so  far  as  there  are  choices  or  orders  or 
the  passing  of  laws,  they  are  his  decisions,  orders, 
or  laws. 

Constitutional  Governments.  In  describing  all 
governments  that  are  not  absolute  as  being  constitu- 
tional, we  use  a  term  which  covers  countries  of  widely 
differing  degrees  of  freedom.  We  only  mean  that 
in  all  these  there  is  some  effective  check  upon  the 
mere  will  of  the  ruler  and  that  the  people  have  some 
voice  in  their  government. 

A  constitutional  government  may  have  at  its 
head  either  an  hereditary  monarch  or  an  elected 
president.  Its  degree  of  freedom  depends  on  whether 
the  people  are  the  real  law-makers,  and  not  on  the 
way  in  which  the  chief  executive  is  placed  in  office. 
For  instance,  the  hereditary  limited  monarchy  of 
England  is  immeasurably  more  free  than  the  elective 
republic  of  Mexico.  Hence  by  a  limited  monarchy 
we  mean  one  in  which  the  monarch  must  rule  in 
obedience  to  law  and  is  in  fact  as  well  as  profession 
only  the  first  servant  of  the  state.  By  a  republic 
we  mean  a  country  which  periodically  elects  its 


The  English  Constitution  7 

chief  ruler.  These  are  simply  two  forms  of  the  large 
class  known  as  constitutional  governments. 

Centralized  and  Federal  Governments.  Let  us 
take  up  the  next  subdivision.  Either  a  limited 
monarchy  or  a  republic  may  be  either  centralized 
or  federal.  By  centralized  we  mean  that  all  au- 
thority is  derived  from  the  central  government, 
or  the  consolidated  nation,  and  that  any  local 
government  may  be  changed  or  disestablished  or  its 
acts  controlled  by  the  central  power.  That  is,  the 
entire  body  of  the  nation  can,  through  its  central 
government,  do  anything  it  chooses,  and  the  local 
subdivisions  have  no  powers  or  rights  that  are  re- 
served from  interference,  control,  or  destruction  by 
the  rest  of  the  country.  The  limited  monarchy  of 
England  is  such  a  centralized  government,  and  so  is 
the  republic  of  France.  One  is  a  centralized  limited 
monarchy;  the  other,  a  centralized  republic,  and 
both  are  free,  self-governing,  and  constitutional. 

The  United  States,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  federal 
republic,  and  the  German  Empire  is  a  federal  limited 
monarchy;  that  is,  these  countries  are  made  up  of 
States,  each  of  which  has  its  rights  which  the  central 
government  must  respect.  Matters  of  national 
interest  are  under  the  control  of  the  federal,  or 
national  government,  but  matters  concerning  only 
one  State  or  its  people  are  under  the  control  of  the 
government  of  each  State  and  cannot  be  touched  by 


8  The  Legislature 

the  central  authority.  The  federal  form  of  govern- 
ment is  suited  to  large  countries  whose  various  sec- 
tions differ  in  traditions  or  local  conditions,  and 
centralized  government  for  small  countries  all  of 
whose  sections  are  very  similar.  Indeed,  the  people 
of  a  very  large  country  could  hardly  preserve  their 
freedom  under  any  except  a  federal  form  of  govern- 
ment; for  they  would  be  practically  deprived  of 
their  liberties  either  by  the  impossibility  of  a  central 
legislature's  finding  time  to  discover  and  attend  to 
the  varying  needs  of  vast  and  widely  separated 
regions,  or  through  mere  indifference  to  the  rights 
of  localities  that  were  not  large  enough  to  compel 
attention. 

Presidential  and  Parliamentary  Governments. 
The  last  division  is  into  presidential  and  parliamen- 
tary governments.  The  fact  that  the  head  of  the 
state  is  a  president  does  not  necessarily  indicate  that 
the  government  is  what  for  our  present  purpose  we 
call  presidential.  The  term  is  adopted  from  the 
United  States  and  means  that  the  chief  executive 
has  powers  and  independence  similar  to  those  of  the 
American  President;  that  is,  he  is  elected  indepen- 
dently of  the  legislature  and  continues  to  hold  office 
to  the  end  of  the  term  for  which  he  is  chosen,  no 
matter  whether  the  legislature  approves  of  him  and 
his  policies  or  not,  and  further  that  he  possesses  the 
reality  of  executive  power.  Parliamentary  govern- 


The  English  Constitution  9 

ment  means,  however,  that  the  real  executive  officers 
are  given  their  positions  because  they  are  favoured 
by  the  legislature  (though  usually  they  are  not  for- 
mally elected  by  it)  and  must  resign  if  they  cannot 
induce  a  majority  in  the  popular  branch  to  vote  for 
their  policies.  Parliamentary  government  is  thus 
one  in  which  the  legislature  is  the  dominant  author- 
ity that  makes  or  displaces  the  executive.  England 
is  the  typical  example  of  this  form  of  government, 
and  its  name  is  derived  from  her  Parliament. 

Thus  by  reference  to  our  table  we  see  that  Eng- 
land is  a  parliamentary,  centralized,  constitutional, 
limited  monarchy ;  while  the  United  States  is  a  presi- 
dential, federal,  constitutional  republic.  They  fall 
into  the  same  class  only  in  being  constitutional, 
or  free;  but  this  is  of  more  significance  than  all  the 
other  classifications;  because  where  the  people  are 
^really  free  to  govern  themselves,/  the  forms  which 
they  choose  to  use,  though  a  matter  of  importance, 
are  entirely  secondary  to  the  fundamental  fact  of 
freedom. 

Written  and  Unwritten  Constitutions.  There  is 
another  difference  between  states,  one  which  we 
have  not  indicated  in  our  table,  that  is,  between 
those  which  have  a  written  and  those  which  have 
an  unwritten  constitution.  Despotic  countries,  gene- 
rally speaking,  have  no  written  constitutions;  but 
among  free  countries  there  are  none  that  are  without 


io  The  Legislature 

them  except  England  and  Hungary,  which  have 
what  is  known  as  the  unwritten  constitution. 

We  are  familiar  with  the  written  constitution  from 
our  knowledge  of  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  the  best  example  of  that  form  of  government. 
That  is  to  say,  in  the  United  States  (and  in  all  free 
countries,  except  England  and  Hungary,  it  is  more 
or  less  the  same)  there  is  one  legal  document,  adopted 
at  a  particular  time,  which  lays  down  the  organiza- 
tion and  authority  of  the  various  departments  and 
officers  of  government,  grants  them  certain  powers, 
and  denies  them  others.  This  is  the  fundamental, 
or  supreme,  law  and  must  be  obeyed  by  the  legisla- 
ture, president,  king,  and  judges.  At  least,  all  offi- 
cials are  sworn  to  obey  it,  but  in  very  few  countries 
besides  the  United  States  is  there  an  effective  method 
of  restraining  legislative  or  executive  acts  that  are 
contrary  to  the  constitution.  The  existence  of  a 
written  constitution,  however,  is  of  little  value  un- 
less the  people  have  the  spirit  and  power  of  freedom; 
for  there  are  countries  with  elaborate  written  con- 
stitutions which  have  not  a  tithe  of  the  freedom  of 
others  whose  constitutions  are  what  we  call  un- 
written. 

England's  Unwritten  Constitution.  England  fur- 
nishes the  great  example  of  the  unwritten  constitu- 
tion. That  is  to  say,  her  constitution  is  not  written 
in  any  one  document,  and  parts  of  it  have  grown  up 


The  English  Constitution  n 

by  custom  and  have  never  been  formally  adopted 
by  any  governmental  body  or  court.  Let  us,  then, 
enquire,  What  is  the  constitution  of  England?  It 
consists  of  three  elements:  First,  %reat_jtatutes.  or 
acts  of  Parliament,  in  which  from  time  to  time  have 
been  embodied  the  fundamental  liberties  of  Parlia- 
ment and  people,  such  as  Magna  Charta,  the  Bill 
of  Rights,  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act,  and  the  laws 
establishing  the  well-nigh  universal  right  of  adult 
males  to  vote.  Some  of  these  laws  were  exacted  by 
the  nation  in  arms  against  tyrannical  kings  or  by 
the  masses  of  the  people  in  threatened  insurrection 
against  the  aristocracy,  amounting  in  effect  to  poli- 
tical revolution.  Most,  however,  were  adopted 
after  unusually  serious  deliberation  in  times  of 
crisis,  but  without  popular  disorder. 

But  it  should  be  understood  that  these  great  con- 
stitutional statutes,  or  acts  of  Parliament,  are  not 
marked  in  any  way  or  treated  by  the  courts  as  of 
any  different  character  from  ordinary  laws.  They 
are  recognized  as  the  basis  of  the  constitution  simply 
by  common  consent.  It  is  sometimes  said  that 
Parliament  can  repeal  Magna  Charta  or  the  Habeas 
Corpus  Act  by  the  same  process  as  that  by  which  it 
provides  for  building  a  bridge  across  the  Thames  or 
combating  the  cattle  tick.  While  this  is  formally 
true,  it  is  really  misleading;  for  as  a  matter  of  fact 
no  fundamental  change  in  the  great  laws  recognized 


12  The  Legislature 

as  a  part  of  the  constitution  can  be  made  without 
such  a  prolonged  and  obstinate  opposition  that  the 
nation  would  be  fully  roused  to  the  importance  of 
the  issue.  It  is  even  becoming  an  established  custom, 
itself  a  part  of  the  constitution,  that  no  important 
law  of  the  kind  called  constitutional  should  be 
adopted  without  first  having  been  fully  discussed 
and  then  passed  upon  by  a  new  Parliament  elected 
principally  for  that  purpose. 

Second,  a  part  of  the  English  constitution  consists 
of  fundamental  property  and  personal  rights  de- 
veloped through  centuries  by  the  courts  and  con- 
stituting the  most  important  part  of  the  common 
law.1 

Third,  the  English  constitution  consists  in  part 
of  a  number  of  political  customs  which  are  obeyed 
as  though  they  were  law,  but  which  are  not  law  and 
would  not  be  enforced  by  the  courts.  These  are 
the  customs,  or  conventions,  of  the  constitution,  as, 

1  Statute  law  is  law  passed  by  Parliament  or  legislature.  Com- 
mon law  did  not  originate  by  being  passed  by  any  legislature,  but 
consists  of  rules  and  customs  which  have  been  observed  by  the 
people  and  enforced  by  the  courts  for  centuries,  and  is  in  some  of 
its  parts  in  fact  older  than  Parliament  itself.  As  the  old  writers  put 
it,  it  hath  been  law  and  custom  since  the  memory  of  man  runneth 
not  to  the  contrary.  Common  law  has  to  do  with  the  fundamental 
relationships  of  life,  as,  e.g.,  the  right  of  a  parent  to  discipline  his 
child,  or  of  a  person  to  protect  himself  from  assault.  The  ordinary 
crimes  are  common  law  crimes.  E.g.,  before  there  was  any  Par- 
liament, men  punished  murder,  house-burning,  and  theft.  Common 
law  is  often  changed  by  statute  law,  as,  e.g.,  abolishing  a  man's 
common  law  right  to  whip  his  wife.  See  pages  188  and  189. 


The  English  Constitution  13 

e.  g.,  the  rule  that  the  Prime  Minister  must  be  the 
leader  of  the  party  having  a  majority  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  and  that  the  King  is  obliged  to  sign 
any  bill  that  passes  both  houses  of  Parliament. 

Summing  up,  we  may  say  that  the  English  consti- 
tution consists  of  certain  great  fundamental  statutes ; 
of  a  body  of  rights  and  rules  grown  up  in  the  courts 
as  a  part  of  the  common  law,  and  of  a  number  of 
rules  governing  the  conduct  of  Ministers,  King,  and 
Parliament  which  are  so  generally  recognized  that 
any  man  or  group  of  men  would  find  it  impossible 
to  disregard  them.  The  fact  that  such  a  compli- 
cated and  delicate  organism  can  persist  amidst  the 
fierce  collisions  of  politics  is  largely  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  English  government  has  been  developed 
and  directed  by  a  governing  class,  who  recognize 
the  necessity  of  playing  the  game  according  to  the 
rules,  and  entertain  no  extreme  or  violent  policies  for 
the  accomplishment  of  which  they  would  be  willing 
to  upset  the  machinery  of  the  state.  What  might 
be  the  effect  of  the  general  participation  of  the 
masses  of  the  people  in  the  administration  of  the 
government  upon  the  structure  and  character  of 
the  English  constitution,  suggests  some  very  serious 
questions. 

Ease  of  Amending  the  English  Constitution.  It 
is  evident  that  under  such  a  system  changes  in  consti- 
tutional custom  may  take  place  almost  unnoticed, 


14  The  Legislature 

and  that  even  fundamental  constitutional  laws  may 
be  altered  much  more  easily  than  under  the  written 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  as  only  a  majority 
vote  in  Parliament  is  necessary.  ^H°nrp  theJPn^ 
lish  constitutioruis-^ax)keii.,Qfas  flexible  and  ours  as 


Americans  understand  that  to  alter  their  constitu- 
tion the  amendment  must  be  formally  proposed, 
voted  on  in  a  special  way,  and  carried  by  a  larger 
majority  than  is  required  for  an  ordinary  statute. 
There  is  no  special  procedure  in  amending  the  con- 
stitution in  England;  though  it  is  of  importance  to 
remember,  as  explained  above,  that  it  is  coming  to 
be  a  recognized  custom  that  no  fundamental  change 
in  the  law  of  the  constitution  should  be  made  with- 
out its  having  been  thoroughly  discussed  and  a  new 
Parliament's  having  been  elected  on  that  issue.  A 
certain  formality  and  deliberation  are  thus  secured 
which  tend  to  avoid  ill-considered,  hasty  change. 
And  let  us  notice,  too,  that  the  gradual  solidifying 
of  this  very  proper  idea  into  a  generally  recognized 
rule  itself  illustrates  how  the  English  amend  the 
custom,  or  conventions,  of  the  constitution. 

We  understand,  then,  that  when  an  Englishman 

denounces  a  proposed  statute  as  unconstitutional, 

he  does  not  mean,  as  would  an  American,  that  it 

rould  be  null  and  void  even  if  enacted  by  Parliament, 

>ut  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  existing  constitutional 


The  English  Constitution  15 

laws  and  customs  which  ought  to  be  regarded  as 
sacred. 

Fusion  of  the  Departments.  Perhaps  as  striking 
a  feature  of  the  English  government  as  its  unwritten 
constitution  is  the  fusion  of  the  great  departments, 
the  legislative,  the  executive,  and  the  judiciary.  To 
exhibit  this  by  way  of  contrast,  let  us  take  the  system 
of  the  United  States.  In  this  country,  in  both  the 
State  and  National  governments,  a  very  thorough 
division  of  governmental  powers  is  made  by  assign- 
ing the  making  of  the  laws  to  the  legislature,  their 
enforcement  to  an  executive,  irremovable  by  the 
legislature, I  and  their  interpretation  and  application 
in  cases  between  individuals  to  the  judiciary,  simi- 
larly independent.  This  characteristic  of  our  gov- 
ernment, the  main  feature  of  which  is  the  rigid 
separation  of  the  executive  and  legislative  branches, 
is  largely  due  to  a  failure  of  the  framers  of  the 
American  system  to  perceive  the  real  nature  of  their 
English  model. 

In  1787,  the  King  was  theoretically,  as  he  still  is 
for  that  matter,  the  independent  executive  branch 
of  the  government;  whereas,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  he 
had  been  for  more  than  sixty  years  gradually  losing 
his  authority  through  its  absorption  by  the  Cabinet, 
which  had  been  in  the  meantime  becoming  in  effect 
the  executive  committee  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

1  Except  of  course,  on  conviction  upon  impeachment. 


1 6  The  Legislature 

The  extent  to  which  this  process 'had  gone  and  its 
ultimate  tendencies  were  by  no  means  realized  even 
by  many  thoughtful  observers,  and  consequently, 
the  theoretical  separation  of  the  executive,  legislative, 
and  judicial  departments  was  being  very  much 
praised  as  still  a  reality,  especially  by  certain  writers 
in  England  who  desired  to  magnify  the  power  of 
the  King  and  save  what  remained  of  it  from  the 
encroachments  of  the  Commons,  and  for  the  opposite 
reason  by  others  in  France  who  wished  to  break 
down  the  royal  despotism  then  dominant  in  that 
country  by  emphasizing  the  necessity  of  an  independ- 
ent legislature.  These  theories,  coupled  with  the 
fact  that  as  colonists  the  Americans  had  been  ac- 
customed to  a  strong  executive,  the  royal  Governor, 
who  was  independent  of  the  colonial  Assembly, 
led  our  forefathers  to  arrange  for  the  most  thorough 
separation  of  the  three  departments  to  be  found  in 
history,  with  the  result  that  the  political  institu- 
tions of  the  two  great  branches  of  the  English  speak- 
ing peoples,  inheriting  the  same  political  traditions, 
were  from  that  time  marked  by  a  very  decided 
difference. 

In  England  the  absorption  of  the  royal  power 
continued  to  such  an  extent  that  the  control  over 
the  entire  executive  passed  into  the  hands  of  the 
House  of  Commons.  Thus  the  nation  from  whom 
we  copied  our  system  of  "checks  and  balances" 


The  English  Constitution  17 

as  supposedly  the  only  means  by  which  tyranny 
could  be  prevented  has  almost  wholly  cast  aside  all 
checks  and  balances,  and  seems  to  have  proved,  up 
to  the  present  time,  that  the  popular  will,  among  a 
highly  civilized  people  notably  gifted  in  public  self- 
control  and  following  the  leadership  of  a  patriotic 
governing  class,  is  itself  a  sufficient  safeguard  to 
individual  and  national  liberty. 

Even  the  judiciary  are  not  independent  of  control 
by  Parliament;  for  they  may  be  discharged  without 
any  reason  assigned  at  the  request  of  a  mere  majority 
vote  of  the  two  houses,  and  Parliament  may  even, 
as  it  has  occasionally  done,  direct  them  to  change 
their  interpretation  of  the  law.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  judges  are  as  free  and  unintimidated  in  England 
as  in  the  United  States,  and  Parliament  would  never 
interfere  in  the  management  of  an  individual  case. 

The  nature  and  extent  of  the  fusion  of  govern- 
mental functions  will  appear  as  we  study  the  rela- 
tions of  the  Cabinet  and  the  House  of  Commons,  when 
we  shall  perceive  that  this  second  fundamental  charac- 
teristic of  the  English  Government  is  mainly  due  to 
the  other,  the  absence  of  a  written  constitution. 


CHAPTER  II 

PARLIAMENT 

Place  of  Meeting.  The  body  which  rules  over 
the  British  Empire  has  been  called  not  only  the 
Parliament  of  the  United  Kingdom,1  but  "the 
mother  of  Parliaments,"  since  from  it  have  sprung 
by  descent  or  imitation,  direct  or  indirect,  the  scores 
of  legislatures  all  over  the  world  through  which  men 
govern  themselves. 

Parliament  meets  in  a  vast  Gothic  building  in  the 
heart  of  London  covering  an  area  of  eight  acres  of 
ground,  and  called  The  Houses  of  Parliament,  or  the 
New  Palace  of  Westminster.  Immediately  to  the 
west  across  the  open  square  called  the  Old  Palace 
Yard  lies  Westminster  Abbey,  containing  the  re- 
mains of  many  of  the  famous  characters  in  the 

xlt  was  the  English  Parliament  until  1707,  when  England  and 
Scotland  were  united  to  form  the  one  kingdom  of  Great  Britain. 
When  Ireland  was  joined  to  Great  Britain  by  the  act  of  Union  in 
1800,  the  name  was  changed  to  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland.  The  word  England  is  often  used  when  Great  Britain 
or  the  United  Kingdom  would  be  more  accurate. 

18 


Parliament  19 

nation's  history,  in  contemplating  whom  Holmes 
exclaimed  of  England: 

One  half  whose  dust  has  walked  the  rest 
In  heroes,  martyrs,  poets,  sages. 

Though  the  Abbey  reaches  far  back  into  the  Middle 
Ages  and  the  Parliament  building  is  less  than  a 
century  old,  they  both,  with  their  soaring  pointed 
architecture,  call  up  England's  past.  The  innumer- 
able epoch-making  events  which  have  centred  around 
this  place  for  the  better  part  of  a  thousand  years 
make  it  one  of  the  great  historic  spots  of  the  world. 

Besides  the  halls  of  both  houses,  there  are  in  the 
Parliament  building  many  offices  and  a  number  of 
official  residences.  The  chamber  of  the  Commons 
lies  in  the  northern  and  that  of  the  Lords  in  the 
southern  end.  Both  are  so  small  as  to  seat  only 
about  half  the  members,  the  others  having  to  stand 
or  crowd  into  the  gallery  when  important  business 
draws  a  large  attendance. 

Unlimited  Power  of  Parliament.  "The  High 
Court  of  Parliament"  strictly  speaking  consists  of 
three  branches,  the  King,  the  House  of  Lords,  and 
the  House  of  Commons;  though,  on  account  of  the 
disappearance  of  the  King's  authority,  we  generally 
think  of  its  including  only  the  two  houses.  Jt  is 
the  supreme  legislature  over  the  entire.  British  Em- 
pire and  has  unlimited  legal  authority  to  pass  any 


20  The  Legislature 

vlaw,  good  or  bad,  to  bind  all  parts  of  the  Empire  or 

ly  part  'separately. 

The  better  to  realize  the  two  aspects  of  this  un- 
limited authority,  let  us  contrast  it  with  the  powers 
of  the  American  Congress.  By  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  the  authority  of  Congress  is 
limited  in  breadth,  so  to  speak,  by  the  rights  of  the 
States.  That  is  to  say,  certain  broad  fields  of  legisla- 
tion are  closed  to  it  and  reserved  for  State  action. 
Second,  the  authority  of  Congress  is  limited  in  height, 
so  to  speak.  That  is  to  say,  many  rights  are  placed 
above  the  power  of  Congress  to  touch,  because  it  is 
not  considered  just  that  any  government  should  be 
allowed  to  restrain  the  freedom  of  the  citizen  in 
these  particulars. 

To  shift  our  figure  to  England,  the  authority  of 
Parliament  is  without  limits  in  breadth;  for  every 
legislature  of  a  distant  colony,  an  English  county, 
a  Scottish  town,  or  an  Irish  parish  exists  by  its  crea- 
tion or  consent,  has  no  reserved  rights  which  it  must 
respect,  and  may  by  it  be  legally  abolished.  Noth- 
ing could  better  illustrate  the  character  of  a  cen- 
tralized, consolidated  state,  so  different  from  the 
federal  system  of  the  United  States.  Likewise  the 
powers  of  the  British  Parliament  are  unlimited  in 
height ;  for  there  are  no  rights  of  the  citizen  on  which 
it  may  not  lay  its  hand  to  restrict  or  even  destroy. 
No  written  constitution  forbids  it  to  proclaim  martial 


Parliament  21 

law,  to  deny  the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  or  openly  to 
build  up  one  section  of  the  country  at  the  expense  of 
another  by  exempting  it  from  taxation  or  forbidding 
rival  regions  from  competing  with  its  industries. 

We-must  not  be  misled  by  the  description  of  this 
legally  unlimited  and  potentially  despotic  power. 
Despite  the  apparent  contradiction,  this  all-powerful 
Parliament  is  as  truly  a  limited,  constitutional 
government  as  any  in  the  world ;  for  it  is  bounded  by 
the  conservatism  and  free  spirit  of  a  people  wonder- 
fully gifted  and  long  practiced  in  the  art  of  political 
self-control.  Any  gross  violation  of  the  people's 
interests  would  lead  to  the  overthrow  of  the  offending 
representatives,  and  serious  disregard  of  the  rights 
of  the  colonies  would  lead  to  their  rebellion,  ^Eng- 
land learned  to  her  sorrow  in  1775. 

Disappearance  of  the  Power  of  the  King.  The 
three  factors  legally  composing  Parliament  vary 
greatly  in  importance  and  power,  and  have  varied 
in  the  past.  Under  mighty  sovereigns  like  William 
the  Conqueror,  the  King  really  made  the  laws  "by 
and  with  the  advice  and  consent"  of  his  Great 
Council,  as  what  was  later  to  develop  into  Parlia- 
ment was  then  called;  and  in  fact  he  often  made 
laws  without  the  advice  or  consent  of  anybody  at 
all.  But  as  the  great  nobles  in  the  House  of  Lords 
became  more  concerned  with  the  nation's  rights 
and  the  House  of  Commons  grew  in  independence 


22  The  Legislature 

and  influence,  the  advice  and  consent  became  so 
real  that  the  King  was  forbidden  to  proclaim  any- 
thing law  that  the  houses  had  not  passed.  The 
influence  of  the  houses  finally  grew  to  be  so  great 
that  their  advice  could  not  be  ignored,  and  accord- 
ingly since  1707  no  sovereign  has  ventured  to  reject 
any  bill  which  has  been  passed  by  them;  and  it  may 
now  be  correctly  stated  that  the  King  has  to  sign 
any  law  that  Parliament  sends  him. 

Decline  of  the  Power  of  the  Lords.  Not  only  has 
the  power  of  the  King  declined  as  compared  with 
that  of  the  houses,  but  that  of  the  Lords  has 
sunk  while  that  of  the  Commons  has  risen.  j\fter 
the  Lords  and  Commons  had  together  suppressed  the 
power  of  the  King,  thus  abolishing  despotism,  the 
Commons  took  away  most  of  the  power  of  the  Lords, 
thus  abolishing  class  rule  and  establishing  demo- 
cracy. For  many  years  the  House  of  Commons 
has  been  the  driving  wheel  of  the  British  govern- 
ment, and  in  future  it  is  destined  to  be  still  more 
nearly  the  whole  machine. 

Supremacy  of  the  Commons.  This  growth  in 
power  of  the  Commons  has  gone  so  far  as  to  convert 
Parliament  from  a  genuine  two-chambered  legisla- 
ture to  one  in  which  the  so-called  upper  house  has 
been  reduced  to  a  mere  "house  of  cautious  revision." 
The  fact  that  the  original  two-chambered  legislature, 
copied  all  over  the  world  and  praised  as  the  best 


Parliament  23 

means  of  checking  hasty  and  ill-advised  action, 
should  have  now  become  so  nearly  a  legislature  of 
one  supreme,  unchecked  house,  only  illustrates  how 
governments  as  well  as  plants  and  animals  must 
adapt  themselves  to  new  circumstances. 

Since  1832  it  has  been  recognized  that  if  the  Com- 
mons persisted  in  demanding  the  passage  of  a  law 
that  the  people  wanted,  as  proved  by  an  election 
in  which  this  was  the  principal  issue,  the  Lords  must 
yield  and  pass  the  bill.  If  they  refused,  the  King, 
acting  under  the  necessity  of  popular  demand,  would 
appoint  in  sufficient  numbers  new  lords  who  would 
favour  the  law  to  pass  it.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the 
creation  of  new  lords  has  never  been  necessary; 
for  when  the  Lords  have  seen  that  further  resistance 
would  be  overcome  in  this  way,  they  have  yielded. 
But  this  was  too  cumbersome  and  allowed  the  Lords 
to  block  much  needed  legislation  to  carry  which  it 
was  impracticable  to  be  constantly  employing  such 
unusual  means.  Hence  in  I9JJL,  Parliament  passed  sj 

an  act  making  it  possible  in  future  for  the  Commons 
to  pass  any  law  without  the  consent  of  the  other 
house.  The  Lords,  whose  consent  was  legally  neces- 
sary, would  of  course  never  have  submitted  to  a 
measure  so  considerably  restricting  their  own  power 
except  under  compulsion.  And  so  it  was;  for  after 
the  people  had  repeatedly  endorsed  the  position  of 
the  Commons,  the  King  was  obliged  to  force  their 


24  The  Legislature 

submission  by  the  threat  of  creating  enough  new 
lords  to  pass  it  over  their  opposition. 

The  Parliament  Act  of  191 1.1  The  terms  of  this 
revolutionary  amendment  to  the  English  constitu- 
tion, known  as  the  Parliament  Act  of  1911,  are  as 
follows : 

First,  the  Lords  may  not  alter  in  any  way  a  bill 
to  raise  money,  whether  by  taxation,  loan,  or  any 
other  means,  or  to  appropriate  or  expend  in  any  way 
the  public  funds;  and  if  they  do  not  pass  such  a  bill 
within  one  month  of  receiving  it  from  the  Commons, 
it  shall  be  sent  to  the  King  for  his  signature  and 
thereby  become  law  without  their  consent.  If  a 
dispute  arises  as  to  whether  any  bill  or  clause  of 
a  bill  concerns  finance,  the  decision  of  the  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Commons  shall  be  absolute  and 
final. 

Second,  if  the  Commons  pass  any  other  bill  in 
three  separate  sessions,  with  at  least  two  years 
between  the  first  and  last  passings,  that  bill,  after 
allowing  the  Lords  a  month  to  consider,  is  sent  to 
the  King  for  his  signature  and  becomes  law  without 
the  consent  of  the  Lords.2 


1  An  account  of  the  circumstances  leading  up  to  the  Parliament 
Act  of  1911  will  be  found  at  pages  91-4. 

"The  Parliament  Act  does  not  apply  to  private  bills,  i.e.  bills 
referring  to  some  particular  person  or  locality,  as,  e.g.,  the  request  of 
•a.  certain  town  to  be  allowed  to  build  its  own  waterworks,  or  to 
certain  other  bills  of  minor  importance.  In  fact  the  services  of  the 


Parliament  25 

The  fact  that  these  bills,  like  all  others,  must  be 
signed  by  the  King  before  becoming  law  is  of  slight 
significance.  If  he  should  refuse  to  sign,  a  resolution 
that  his  signature  should  be  presumed,  or  some  other 
means,  would  be  devised  to  overcome  this  difficulty, 
just  as  in  the  case  of  the  opposition  of  the  peers. 

During  the  past  hundred  years,  the  absorption  of 
power  by  the  Commons  has  so  largely  drawn  poli- 
tical interest  and  influence  away  from  the  other 
house  that  the  transfer  of  a  man  from  the  Commons 
to  the  Lords  by  reason  of  his  succeeding  to  a  title 
on  the  death  of  his  father  has  arrested  many  a  pro- 
mising political  career. 

Control  of  the  Commons  over  the  Raising  and 
Spending  of  Money.  The  supreme  authority  in  the 
state  has  been  attained  by  the  Commons  through 
their  control  over  the  government's  income.  True, 
in  the  long  struggle  there  were  other  issues  at  stake 
and  in  any  event  it  was  almost  inevitable  that  the 
majority  should  come  to  rule;  and  yet  it  is  none  the 
less  true  that  it  was  with  this  weapon  chiefly  that 
the  representatives  of  the  people  won  their  victory. 
Long  ago  it  came  to  be  an  established  principle  of 


Lords  in  considering  private  bills  are  recognized  as  very  valuable. 
See  Chapter  VI,  pages  68-9. 

It  makes  no  difference  whether  the  second  and  third  passings  of 
a  bill  are  by  the  same  House  of  Commons  as  that  which  initiated  the 
bill,  or  whether  a  new  house  has  been  elected  since  the  first  passage 
of  the  bill. 


26  The  Legislature 

the  English  constitution  that  no  one  should  tax  the 
people  except^their  elected  j£preseatatives.  Thus 
the  Lords  ceased  to  take  any  part  in  levying  taxes, 
except  merely  to  pass  the  bill  as  a  matter  of  form, 
even  though  they  were  themselves  also  taxed  at  the 
same  rate  as  other  people,  and,  being  very  rich,  paid 
correspondingly  large  amounts.  This  came  to  be  re- 
garded as  one  of  the  strongest  customs  of  the  constitu- 
tion, and  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  English  people 
would  rise  up  in  civil  war  rather  than  surrender  it. 
Whoever  controls  taxation  soon  comes  to  control 
the  whole  government ;  for  he  can  take  the  position 
that  unless  his  wishes  are  regarded  in  other  matters, 
he  will  stop  the  whole  machinery  of  government  by 
cutting  off  the  income. 

Time  of  Meeting.  The  ancient  statute  requiring 
Parliament  to  meet  once  in  three  years  long  ago  be- 
came obsolete  through  the  adoption  of  two  customs 
regarding  the  revenue  and  the  army  that  make  it 
necessary  for  it  to  meet  every  year.  Parliament 
grants  appropriations  for  one  year  only,1  and  passes 
the  law  authorizing  the  King  to  maintain  the  army 
only  for  the  same  length  of  time;  and  hence  .the 

1  Certain  fixed  charges,  as  interest  on  the  national  debt,  the 
support  of  the  royal  family  and  of  the  courts  of  justice,  and  a  few 
trivial  items  are  provided  by  standing  law  which  does  not  require 
annual  enactment.  These  charges  equal,  in  ordinary  years,  almost 
one  fifth  the  total  expenditures.  See  Statesman's  Year  Book  for 
1913,43. 


Parliament  27 

wheels  of  government  would  soon  stop  if  Parliament 
were  not  summoned.  They  meet  about  thejirst 
part  of  Februajy  and  remain  in  session  until  about 
the  first  part  of  August,  with  a  recess  at  Easter  and 
another  seven  weeks  later  at  Whitsuntide.  In 
extraordinary  circumstances,  they  are  assembled 
as  the  occasion  requires,  the  date  of  meeting  in  all 
cases  being  fixed  by  the  King,  or  more  correctly,  by 
the  Prime  Minister  acting  in  his  name. 

"The  height  of  the  season"  for  society  and  busi- 
ness is  not  the  winter,  as  in  American  cities,  but  May 
and  June.  Parliament  being  in  the  midst  of  its 
session,  the  nobility  are  in  their  London  houses,  and 
the  capital  is  crowded  with  the  brilliant  social  and 
political  leaders  of  the  kingdom.  The  most  famous 
actors,  singers,  and  musicians  fill  the  theatres,  and 
tourists  from  every  quarter  of  the  globe  throng  this 
the  greatest  city  of  the  world. 

Opening  and  Closing  of  Parliament.  At  the  be- 
ginning of  the  session,  the  King  goes  in  state,  gor- 
geously apparelled  and  magnificently  attended,  from 
his  palace  in  London  to  the  Houses  of  Parliament. 
He  takes  his  seat  upon  the  throne  in  the  House  of 
Lords  and  a  messenger  is  sent  to  summon  the  Com- 
mons. The  latter  stand  in  the  rear  of  the  hall,  and 
the  King  reads  "the  speech  from  the  throne," 
which  has  been  written  by  the  Prime  Minister  and 
revised  in  the  Cabinet,  outlining  the  program  which 


28  The  Legislature 

the  Ministry  intend  to  carry  through.1  The  King 
then  retires  and  the  Commons  withdraw  to  their 
chamber.  At  the  conclusion  of  Parliament,  the 
sovereign  again  appears  in  the  same  place  and  dis- 
misses the  assembled  houses. 

Proroguing  and  Dissolving  Parliament.  Only  the 
King  can  call  or  dismiss  Parliament;  but  in  this,  as 
in  other  respects,  his  authority  is  only  that  of  Par- 
liament itself  expressed  through  the  Ministry.  This 
is  a  relic  of  the  time  when  he  really  called  it  to  give 
him  advice  or  money,  and  sent  the  members  home 
when  he  had  got  what  he  wanted.  At  the  end  of  its 
regular  annual  session,  its  desire  to  go  home  having 
been  signified,  the  King  prorogues  (i.  e.  adjourns) 
the  body.  If  instead  of  a  temporary  adjournment, 
the  service  of  its  members  is  to  be  ended  and  a  new 
House  of  Commons  chosen,  the  King  issues  a  pro- 
clamation, either  at  the  time  of  closing  the  session 
or  later,  dissolving  Parliament  and  naming  the  date 
on  which  a  new  House  of  Commons  is  to  be  elected. 

If  not  sooner  dissolved,  Parliament  would  by  law 
expire  at  the  end  of  five  years  since  the  last  election ; 
but  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  always  dissolved  and  is 
never  allowed  to  live  out  the  full  term  for  which  it 
was  elected.2 

xln  the  absence  of  the  sovereign,  some  high  official  reads  the 
speech  and  formally  opens  Parliament. 
2  See  pages  39  and  46-50. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS 

Membership.  The  House  of  Commons  consists 
of  495  members  from  England  and  Wales,  72  from 
Scotland,  and  103  from  Ireland,  making  a  total  of 
670. x  The  attendance,  however,  when  the  proceed- 
ings are  dull  is  very  small,  frequently  falling  as  low 
as  25  or  30;  but  the  average  is  of  course  much  higher; 
and  when  important  votes  or  speeches  are  expected, 
the  greater  part  of  the  members  are  found  in  their 
places. 

Election  Districts.  The  six  hundred  seventy  mem- 
bers of  the  House  of  Commons  are  elected  by  single 
districts,2  as  are  our  Congressmen,  with  the  exception 
that  a  few  districts  elect  two  members  each.  The 

1  The  act  for  Irish  Home  Rule  passed  in  1914,  but  temporarily 
withheld  from  going  into  operation,  reduces  the  number  of  repre- 
sentatives from  Ireland  to  42,  thus  leaving  the  total,  after  that 
act  shall  go  into  effect,  609.  See  Chapter  XXVI. 

a  They  are  called  parliamentary  divisions;  but  I  shall  speak  of 
them  as  districts  as  more  natural  for  Americans,  not  to  speak  of  the 
danger  of  confusion  in  the  other  term  with  "division"  in  another 
sense.  See  page  77. 

29 


3O  The  Legislature 


population  of  the  districts  varies  greatly.  There  is 
no  attempt  to  have  the  districts  of  equal  population. 
It  is  surprising,  for  that  matter,  to  find  how  widely 
Congressional  districts  vary  in  population,  on  account 
of  the  necessity  of  following  certain  established 
boundary  lines.  The  average  population  of  a  par- 
liamentary district  is  about  60,000,  which  gives 
each  member  between  a  third  and  a  fourth  as  many 
constituents  as  are  represented  by  a  member  of 
Congress  in  the  United  States.  Some  districts 
contain  less  than  a  third  of  the  average  of  60,000 
and  a  few  about  three  times  more  than  that.  The 
proportion  between  the  largest  and  smallest  district 
is  in  fact  almost  fifteen  to  one.1 

The  districts,  or  more  properly  constituencies, 
which  elect  members  are  of  three  kinds:  counties, 
which  elect  377  members;  boroughs,  which  elect  284, 
and  universities,  which  elect  9.* 

County  Members.  It  would  seem  more  correct 
to  speak  of  country  rather  than  county  members; 
for  the  member  is  no  longer  elected  by  the  whole 
county,  except  in  the  case  of  a  few  small  ones,  but 
by  a  small  division  of  the  county  set  off  for  this 

1  Lowell,  i.,  200.     Compare  the  United  States  Senate,  where  the 
Senators  from  New  York  represent  one  hundred  and  twelve  times-as 
many  people  as  those  from  Nevada. 

2  The  membership  of  the  House  of  Commons  being  reduced  about 
one  tenth  by  the  Irish  Home  Rule  act,  these  figures  will  be  changed 
in  about  that  proportion  when  that  law  goes  into  effect. 


The  House  of  Commons  31 

purpose.  Places  of  less  than  fifteen  thousand  in- 
habitants are,  with  a  few  exceptions,  treated  as 
country  and  go  along  with  the  rural  region  by  which 
they  are  surrounded. 

Borough  Members.  The  parliamentary  borough 
is,  roughly  speaking,  a  city  of  over  fifteen  thousand 
inhabitants — usually  much  larger — which  elects  its 
own  member  or  members  to  Parliament.  If  it  is  a 
small  city,  it  elects  as  a  whole  its  one  member;  if  a 
large  city,  it  is  divided  into  as  many  separate  districts 
as  the  number  of  members  to  which  it  is  entitled.1 
There  are  many  boroughs,  or  cities,  however,  which 
have  their  regular  city  government,  but  simply  form 
part  of  a  country  district  for  electing  a  member  of 
Parliament. 

University  Members.  Lastly,  the  eight  leading 
universities  of  the  United  Kingdom2  send  nine  mem- 
bers to  the  House  of  Commons,  several  sending  two 
each,  several  one,  and  in  several  cases  two  universi- 
ties combining  to  elect  one  member.  These  members 
are  elected  by  the  graduates  of  the  university,  and 
it  is  a  fact  that  the  constituency  which  has  the  right 

1  The  "city"  of  London,  i.  e.,  the  square  mile  in  the  heart  of  the 
metropolis,  as  one  district  elects  two  members.  The  rest  of  the 
metropolis  is  divided  into  single  member  districts  like  any  other  large 
city. 

3  After  the  Home  Rule  Act  goes  into  effect,  two  Irish  university 
members  will  sit  in  the  Irish  Parliament,  but  the  two  Irish  university 
representatives  will  not  then  be  among  the  forty-two  Irish  members 
of  the  Imperial  Parliament. 


32  The  Legislature 

to  vote  for  one  of  these  members  is  more  numerous 
than  the  voters  in  a  number  of  the  smaller  districts. 
Reasons  for  County,  Borough,  and  University 
Constituencies.  The  reason  for  assigning  repre- 
sentatives to  the  cities,  rural  districts,  and  univer- 
sities separately,  instead  of  dividing  the  country 
uniformly  into  districts  without  attempting  any 
distinction  or  grouping  of  urban  and  rural  popula- 
tion, is  that  thus  leach  of  thesediffering^n^erests^is 
assured  a  fair  representation.  Otherwise  it  might 
happen  that  in  times  of  political  excitement  one  or 
the  other  of  the  elements  might  be  shut  out,  virtually 
if  not  absolutely,  by  the  one  which  was  in  the  major- 
ity refusing  to  permit  the  election  of  any  man  not  of 
their  class  of  the  population;  and  so  a  large  element 
of  the  people  would  be  deprived  of  all  voice  in  the 
government.  This  could  not  happen  to  such  a  serious 
extent  in  a  region,  such  as  an  American  State  or  an 
English  county,  which  contains  many  large  cities 
and  also  extensive  and  vigorous  farming  sections; 
for  in  that  case  some  cities  are  virtually  independent 
election  districts,  through  the  control  which  they 
exercise  over  the  districts  in  which  they  lie,  and  the 
rural  population  is  sure  to  triumph  in  some  sections. 
And  yet  even  then  there  might  be  much  ruthless 
overriding  of  the  minority  element  in  many  quarters. 
To  avoid  these  evils,  several  American  States  have 
adopted  the  English  custom  of  setting  off  large  towns 


The  House  of  Commons  33 

as  separate  election  districts  from  the  counties  in 
which  they  lie. 

The  reason  for  allowing  the  university  graduates 
to  collect  at  their  alma  mater  and  elect  a  member  or 
members  is  to  secure  definite  representation  for  jhe 
highly  educated  and  conservativeelement  in  the 
country.  As  the  general  influence  of  this  class  upon 
the  thought  of  the  country  is  far  greater  than  any 
that  can  be  exercised  by  their  special  representatives, 
it  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  this  arrangement 
accomplishes  much  beyond  giving  a  few  seats  to  the 
Conservative  party. 

The  Franchise.  The  parliamentary  franchise, 
i.  e.  the  right  to  vote  for  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  is  not  so  wide  as  that  for  the  election  of 
local  officials,  for  it  includes  no  women,  as  does  the 
latter,  and  is  somewhat  stricter  as  to  the  qualifica- 
tions for  men.  The  movement  towards  manhood 
suffrage,  however,  is  quite  strong,  as  is  also  that  for 
woman  suffrage  for  all  elective  positions. 

The  law  defining  the  qualifications  for  voting  are 
quite  complex;  but  the  following  summary  is  suffi- 
cient for  our  purpose:  In  boroughs,  every  man,  not 
a  lord,  may  vote  who,  either  as  owner  or  tenant, 
occupies  as  head  of  a  household  (though  he  himself 
might  constitute  the  entire  household),  any  house, 
flat,  room,  or  set  of  rooms  in  the  city  constituting  a 
separate  family  abode;  and  also  every  man  who 

3 


34  The  Legislature 

occupies  as  a  lodger  a  room  or  rooms  of  an  annual 
rental  value  of  at  least  £10.  Hence  we  may 
adopt  the  usual  brief  statement  that  in  the  boroughs 
all  " occupiers"  and  "£io  lodgers'*  may  vote  for 
members  of  Parliament. 

In  the  counties  it  is  more  complex.  There  all 
"£io  lodgers"  may  vote,  and  also  the  following: 
all  men  who  own  land  of  a  certain  small  value,  and 
all  men  who  occupy  as  owners  or  tenants  quarters 
or  lands  on  which  local  taxes  are  paid. 

We  may  say  roughly  for  the  whole  United  King- 
dom, that  the  parliamentary  franchise  is  possessed 
by  all  men  who  own  land  or  occupy  a  home  rated  as 
a  separate  dwelling,  either  as  owner  or  tenant,  or 
rent  as  lodgers  quarters  worth  £10  a  year.1 

Three  further  requirements  apply  to  all  classes  of 
voters,  viz.:  they  must  be  twenty-one  years  of  age 
and  must  have  paid  all  taxes  due  upon  any  land  or 
houses  the  ownership  or  occupancy  of  which  secures 
their  right  to  vote,  and  all  occupiers  or  lodgers  must 

1  Dwelling  or  residence  does  not  necessarily  mean  a  complete 
building;  a  tenement  house  might  include  under  one  roof  dozens  of 
"residences." 

Two  more  points  are  to  be  remarked:  The  "county"  districts 
include  many  considerable  towns;  hence  particularly  the  qualifica- 
tion for  lodgers  in  the  counties.  Also  the  voters  in  the  "county 
boroughs,"  i.  e.  cities  having  the  powers  of  independent  county 
governments  (see  page  230  below),  have  the  same  qualifications  as  in 
the  counties.  The  qualifications  for  voting  in  Scotland  and  Ireland 
are  similar,  though  not  identical,  to  those  in  England.  For  details, 
see  Statesmen's  Year  Book. 


The  House  of  Commons  35 

have  occupied  the  same  quarters  for  a  full  year 
previous  to  the  I5th  of  July  preceding  the  election 
at  which  they  propose  to  vote. 

The  law  is  enforced  by  requiring  that  the  voters 
shall  be  registered  every  year.  The  registration 
officers  will  place  no  man's  name  upon  the  list  who 
does  not  possess  the  legal  qualifications.1 

Members  not  Necessarily  Residents  of  their 
Districts.  A  fact  strange  to  Americans  is  that  there 
is  no  rule,  custom,  or  even  general  feeling,  that  the 
member  should  be  a  resident  of  the  district  by  which 
he  is  elected.  In  fact  about  half  of  the  members  of 
the  House  of  Commons  are  not  residents  of  their 
districts.  In  the  United  States  a  member  of  Con- 
gress is  required  by  law  to  be  a  citizen  of  the  State, 
and  by  custom  to  be  a  resident  of  the  district  from 
which  he  is  elected.  Ours  is  the  only  great  self- 
governing  country  in  the  world  which  thus  limits  the 

1  Plural  voting.  As  the  qualifications  for  voting  require  the  own- 
ing or  renting  of  property  in  a  city  or  district  and  say  nothing  as  to 
one  definite  legal  residence,  it  is  evident  that  a  man  might  qualify  to 
vote  in  several  different  parliamentary  districts,  as,  e.  g.,  by  renting 
a  store  in  a  city,  living  in  the  nearby  country,  and  keeping  a  summer 
cottage  at  the  seashore,  or  being  a  university  graduate.  That  was 
the  practice  before  1914,  which  was  recognized  as  having  an  im- 
portant influence  in  close  elections.  There  had  been  for  many 
years  widespread  opposition  to  it  as  undemocratic,  and  in  1914  it 
was  abolished  by  the  first  law  "enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent 
Majesty  (as  the  legal  expression  is),  by  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Commons"  as  provided  under  the  Parliament  Act  of  1911.  It  is 
estimated  that  500,000  voters,  mostly  Conservatives,  were  affected. 
The  plural  vote  by  university  graduates  was  included  in  the  abolition. 


36  The  Legislature 

right  of  the  people  to  get  the  best  services  wherever 
they  can  find  them  and  refuses  to  trust  them  to  choose 
their  servants  from  whatever  part  of  the  State  or 
country  they  please.  Or  to  put  it  in  a  way  which 
better  indicates  its  significance,  we  are  the  only 
people  who  are  so  absorbed  in  local  politics  and  "pull** 
as  to  prefer  an  inferior  resident  to  a  highly  superior 
fellow-citizen  from  just  across  the  river  or  the  county 
line.  Consequently  men  whose  services  are  greatly 
needed  in  Congress  by  their  entire  party,  and  per- 
haps by  the  whole  country,  are  sometimes  kept  out 
of  public  life  by  happening  to  live  in  a  district  which 
for  purely  local  reasons  does  not  choose  to  elect  such 
a  representative.  The  same  is  true  regarding  the 
State  legislatures  and  the  counties  within  the  State, 
and,  except  where  the  commission  form  of  govern- 
ment has  been  adopted,  even  of  the  city  councils 
and  the  wards  within  the  city.  In  other  countries 
able  men  who  live  in  districts  where  the  majority 
is  opposed  to  them  may  be  secured  for  the  public 
service  by  being  elected  from  districts  which  agree 
with  them  in  politics,  but  have  no  candidate  within 
their  borders  of  such  eminence  and  ability. 

Salary.  In  modern  times  members  of  the  House 
of  Commons  did  not  receive  salaries  until  1911;  but 
in  that  year  it  was  enacted  that  they  should  be  paid 
the  small  sum  of  £400  annually.  This  was  done 
because  it  was  considered  contrary  to  democratic 


The  House  of  Commons  37 

principles  to  deprive  a  poor  man  of  the  opportunity 
to  serve  by  reason  of  the  requirement  that  the 
member  should  bear  his  own  expenses;  but  the 
small  salary  provided  really  makes  very  little 
difference;  for  not  only  is  it  insufficient  to  support 
the  member  in  London,  but  it  is  entirely  inadequate 
to  enable  a  poor  man  to  stand  the  heavy  expenses  of 
the  campaign  and  the  social  and  charitable  obliga- 
tions which  it  is  almost  impossible  for  a  member  of 
Parliament  to  escape.  The  distinction  of  belonging 
to  the  House  of  Commons  costs  the  ordinary  mem- 
ber at  least  $15,000  to  $20,000  a  year.1 

The  Speaker.  The  presiding  officer  of  the  Com- 
mons is  the  Speaker.  He  is  chosen  by  each  newly 
elected  House  of  Commons  and  is  formally  approved 
by  the  King,  though  the  day  is  far  past  when  the 
sovereign  would  think  of  disallowing  whomever 
they  should  choose.  The  Speaker's  term  lasts  as 
long  as  that  of  the  house  which  elects  him,  and  it  is 
customary  to  re-elect  him,  irrespective  of  the  fortunes 
of  parties,  as  long  as  he  desires  to  serve.  From  the 
moment  of  his  election  he  becomes  an  impartial, 
non-party  man, J never  voting  except  to  break  a  tie, 

1  Cf.  Lowell,  ii.,  48-49.  £5000  a  year  is  often  spoken  of  as  neces- 
sary. The  £4OO^salary  was  established  mainly  at  the  demand  of  the 
labour  unions,  whose  former  practice  of  supporting  Labour  Party 
members,  of  whom  there  are  in  1911  about  fifty,  was  checked  by  the 
courts.  Labour  Party  members  are  supposed  to  deny  themselves 
the  social  ambitions  and  the  "  nursing  "  of  constituencies  whicn  make 
such  drafts  upon  others. 


38  The  Legislature 

and  presides  with  a  fairness  and  dignity  which  have 
earned  his  office  the  highest  universal  respect.  He 
receives  a  salary  of  five  thousand  pounds  a  year,  a 
residence  in  Westminster  Palace,  and  when  he 
chooses  to  retire,  is  made  a  peer. 

Disqualifications.  In  order  to  check  the  influence 
of  the  King,  it  was  enacted  two  hundred  years  ago 
that  royal  officials  should  not  be  allowed  to  sit  in 
the  Commons.  But  this  does  not  apply  to  army  and 
navy  officers,  nor  to  the  holders  of  the  great  offices 
in  the  executive  department  filled  by  the  King's 
Ministers.  On  the  contrary,  the  custom  of  the  con- 
stitution requires  that  the  Ministers  must  be  mem- 
bers of  Parliament,  and  if  this  were  not  so,  the  Eng- 
lish system  of  government  could  not  exist.  With 
the  exception  noted  above,  *  any  adult  male  subject 
of  the  King  from  any  part  of  the  Empire  may  be 
elected  to  the  House  of  Commons,  except  an  English 
or  Scotch  Lord  or  an  Irish  Lord  who  has  been  elected 
by  his  fellow  Irish  Lords  to  sit  for  life  in  the  House 
of  Lords  of  the  United  Kingdom.  If  the  heir  to  a 
peerage  is  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons  when 
his  father  dies,  his  membership  immediately  ceases 
without  any  ceremony  whatever,  and  he  is  not  per- 
mitted even  to  complete  any  business  in  the  house 
upon  which  he  might  have  been  engaged. 

1  And  a  few  ethers  not  important;  e.  g.,  clergy  of  the  Scotch  and 
English  establishments,  Catholic  priests,  and  certain  criminals. 


The  House  of  Commons  39 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  power  of  the  House  of 
Lords  has  been  so  diminished1  that  it  can  no  longer 
be  regarded  as  an  " estate"  of  the  realm  in  the  medi- 
aeval sense  of  a  separate  class  absolutely  protected 
by  the  organization  of  the  state  against  the  encroach- 
ments of  other  classes,  there  appears  no  good  reason 
for  retaining  the  rule  against  any  peer's  being  elected 
to  the  House  of  Commons.  The  Irish  Home  Rule 
Act  recognizes  this  and  makes  all  peers  eligible  to  the 
Irish  House  of  Commons.  It  is  a  strange  thing  in  a  de- 
mocracy, founded  on  confidence  in  the  people,  to  for- 
bid the  people  to  get  their  representative  where  they 
please.  The  third  estate  would  have  suffered  sadly  in 
the  French  Revolution  if  they  had  been  protected 
against  electing  Count  Mirabeau  their  representative. 

Ministers  in  Parliament.  The  King's  Ministers, 
then,  are  members  of  Parliament,  and  moreover 
they  are  the  leaders  of  that  body  and,  as  will  be 
later  explained,  they  exercise  a  vast  influence  upon 
its  action  in  passing  laws. 

Term,  Dissolution,  etc.  The  Commons  are  elected 
for  a  term  of  five  years2!  but,  as  will  be  explained 
later,  they  are  always  dissolved  sooner;  so  that 
the  average  life  of  a  Parliament  has  proved  for  many 
years  past  to  be  a  little  over  four  years.3  A  dis- 

1  Cf.  the  Parliament  Act  of  1911,  page  24. 

2  The  term  was  seven  years  from  1716  to  1911.     The  term  of  the 
Parliament  elected  in  1911  was  extended  because  of  the  Great  War. 

3  See  page  41,  table  of  the  duration  of  Parliaments  since  1837. 


40  The  Legislature 

solution  sometimes  comes  much  sooner  than  this, 
however,  long  before  the  end  of  the  term  for  which 
the  existing  House  of  Commons  was  elected;  for  if  the 
Ministry  find  themselves  in  disagreement  with  the 
Commons  and  believe  that  the  people  will  agree 
with  them  instead  of  with  the  Commons,  they  dis- 
solve the  .existing  house  and  call  for  the  election  of 
another.1  Furthermore,  it  is  coming  to  be  re- 
cognized that,  if  a  considerable  number  of  bye-elec- 
tions to  fill  the  places  of  members  of  the  house  who 
have  died  or  withdrawn  and  who  were  supporters 
of  the  Ministry  go  against  the  party  represented  -by 
the  Ministers,  they  should  resign  their  positions  or 
order  a  dissolution  in  order  to  give  the  people  the 
opportunity  to  change  the  party  in  power  if  they 
really  so  desire.  The  Commons  are  thus  the  direct 
representatives  of  the  people  and  as  such  are  much 
the  most  powerful  element  in  the  government. 
Hence  it  is,  as  was  explained  in  the  preceding  chap- 
ter, that  they  have  the  absolute  control  over  bills  to 
impose  taxes  or  spend  money,  and  can  pass  any  law 
over  the  protest  of  the  Lords  by  simply  enacting  it  in 
three  successive  sessions  in  not  less  than  two  years. 

Impeachments.  Another  special  power  possessed 
by  the  Commons  alone  is  that  of  bringing  impeach- 
ments against  any  executive  o~r  judicial  officer  of 
the  Crown.  The  origin  and  method  of  operation  of 

1  Cf.  pages  46-50. 


The  House  of  Commons  41 

this  powerful  weapon  of  defence  against  tyranny 
are  described  on  page  102,  which  might  be  read  at 
this  point  as  a  part  of  this  chapter.  Though  im- 
peachment has  not  been  employed  in  England  for 
over  a  hundred  years,  and  probably  will  never  be 
used  there  again,  it  played  its  part  in  the  long  war- 
fare against  tyranny  in  former  times.  It  has  been 
rendered  unnecessary  by  the  law  making  judges 
removable  on  a  request  passed  by  a  mere  majority 
vote  of  both  houses  of  Parliament,  and  the  develop- 
ment of  the  modern  system  of  Cabinet  government, 
by  which  the  Commons  force  the  resignation  of  the 
King's  Ministers  as  soon  as  they  become  objection- 
able, to  say  nothing  of  dangerous. 

THE  DURATION  OF  PARLIAMENTS  SINCE  1837* 
Victoria's  ist  Parliament      3  vears.    o  months.  12  davs 


2d 

5 

II 

4 

f 

3d 

4 

9 

10 

4th 

4 

7 

i 

5th 

i 

ii 

23 

6th 

6 

i 

6 

7th 

3 

2 

27 

8th 

5 

I 

16 

9th 

6 

O 

19 

loth 

5 

6 

20 

nth 

o 

5 

14 

1  2th 

5 

10 

23 

I3th 

2 

ii 

20 

1  4th 

5 

i 

13 

I5th 

Edward  VII's     ist 

5 
3 

i 
ii 

5 
24 

2d 

o 

Q 

14. 

George  V's          ist 

Began  January  31,  1911. 

1  From  the  Statesmen's  Year  Book  for  1915,  p.  6.  Note  that  before 
1911  the  House  of  Commons  was  elected  for  a  term  of  seven  years, 
unless  sooner  dissolved;  since  1911,  for  a  term  of  five  years.  On 
account  of  the  Great  War,  the  term  of  the  Commons  then  sitting  was 
extended  to  seven  years.  , 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  CABINET  AND  THE  COMMONS 

Departments  of  Government  not  Separate  in 
England.  Though  it  is  common  to  discuss  govern- 
ment under  the  heads  of  its  three  great  departments, 
the  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial,  it  is  impossible 
to  treat  any  one  of  these,  particularly  the  legislative 
and  executive,  entirely  separately  in  any  country; 
for  they  are  more  or  less  associated  in  practice. 
This  is  particularly  the  case  in  England.  Though 
we  may  for  clearness  adopt  this  method  of  discussing 
first  the  legislature  and  then  the  executive,  we  must 
constantly  speak  of  the  two  together,  because  they 
are  in  fact  intimately  united. 

The  King  and  the  Cabinet.  The  King,  as  will  be 
explained  in  Chapter  X,  long  ago  ceased  to  be  the 
real  executive  of  England.  That  position  is  held 
by  thejQabinei,  which,  though  in  legal  terms  merely 
the  King's  Ministers,  is  by  the  custom  of  the  constitu- 
tion in,  effect  the  executive  .committee  of  the  House-of- 
Commons.  This  is  only  another  illustration  of  the 

42 


The  Cabinet  and  the  Commons        43 

fact  that  England  is  not  a  government  in  which  one 
department  is  balanced  against  the  other  to  prevent 
either  from  grasping  an  excess  of  power,  but  is  one 
in  which  one  branch,  namely  the  House  of  Commoasr    \f 
has  actually  acquired  almost  all  power,  /  * 

The  Cabinet  the  Leaders  of  the  Majority  Party. 
Let  us  make  this  plainer.  In  the  times  when  the 
King  was  a  much  more  active  factor  in  the  govern- 
ment than  today,  he  would  sometimes  appoint  a 
prominent  member  of  Parliament  as  his  Minister 
in  order  by  the  influence  of  such  a  man  to  get  their 
consent  to  the  royal  plans.  As  Parliament  increased 
in  power,  it  insisted  on  the  Ministers'  being  chosen 
from  among  its  members,  in  order  to  exercise  control 
over  administration;  and  as  the  Commons  gradually 
came  to  be  the  more  powerful  branch  of  Parliament, 
that  house  succeeded  in  establishing  as  one  of  the 
firmest  customs  of  the  constitution  what  King 
William  III  had  begun  merely  as  a  sort  of  experi- 
ment for  getting  his  measures  adopted  more  easily, 
namely,  the  rule  that  the  Ministers  must  be  the 
leaders  of  the  party  having  a  majority  in  the  House 
of  Commons. 

In  a  later  chapter  we  shall  take  up  the  various 
executive  departments.  It  is  sufficient  now  to 
understand  that  in  their  ordinary  executive  duties 
they  are  similar  to  the  departments  headed  by  the 
members  of  the  President's  Cabinet  in  the  United 


44  The  Legislature 

States.  But  here  the  similarity  ends ;  for  the  members 
of  the  American  Cabinet  are  merely  administrators 
of  their  various  departments  and  advisers  of  the 
President;  whereas  the  British  Cabinet  are  all  this 
and  something  very  important  besides. 

Cabinet  and  Ministry.  Two  terms,  which  may 
sometimes  be  used  interchangeably,  but  at  other 
times  must  be  kept  distinct,  are  Cabinet  and  Minis- 
try. The  Ministry  consists  of  about  forty. -..oaen^ 
comprising  all  the  heads  of  departments,  such  as  the 
treasury,  navy,  home  affairs,  etc.,  a  few  important 
assistants,  and  a  number  of  high  officials  of  a  some- 
what formal  and  honorary  character  without  any 
routine  or  departmental  duties.  The  Cabinet,  how- 
ever, is  an  inner  council  of  the  Ministry  that  includes 
only  about  half  its  members.  These  more  important 
officials  (often  called  " Cabinet  Ministers")  are  the 
recognized  leaders  of  the  party  which  at  the  time 
commands  a  majority  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
For  the  better  planning  of  the  work  of  administra- 
tion, they  hold  for  counsel  among  themselves  weekly 
"  Cabinet  meetings."  It  is  they  who  really  conduct 
the 'policy  of  the  government,  without  consulting  the 
rest  of  the  Ministry.  It  is  their  task  to  determine 
what  measures  shall  be  introduced  into  Parliament ; 
and  on  them  rests  directly  and  conspicuously  the 
duty  of  carrying  out  the  party  platform  and  pledges 
and  of  maintaining  the  interests  and  honour  of  the 


The  Cabinet  and  the  Commons       45 

nation.  In  a  word,  the  Cabinet  is  the  real  executive 
in  England. 

Responsible  Ministry.  This  whole  body  of  offi- 
cials, including  both  the  Cabinet  and  non-Cabinet 
Ministers,  are  said  to  form  a  " responsible  Ministry." 
Of  course  any  Minister  is  responsible  in  the  sense 
that  he  must  obey  the  laws  of  his  country  and  is 
subject  to  discharge  if  not  satisfactory  to  his  superior, 
as,  e.  g.,  the  Postmaster-General  of  the  United  States 
would  be  punished  for  violation  of  the  law  and  might 
be  discharged  for  inefficiency  or  disregard  of  the 
wishes  of  the  President.  But  the  English  Ministry 
is  "responsible"  in  another  sense  also.  It  is  respon- 
sible politically  to  Parliament;  i.  e.,  if  it  is  not  ap- 
proved by  a  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons,  it 
must  resign,  without  reference  to  its  honesty,  wis- 
dom, efficiency,  or  any  other  matter  except  that  it 
is  unacceptable  to  a  majority  of  the  representatives 
of  the  people.  In  this  way  the  people  control  both 
the  Parliament  and  the  executive  officers  also. 

A  Minister's  resigning  his  position  as  Minister 
has  no  effect  upon  his  remaining  a  private  member 
of  Parliament. 

Collective  Responsibility.  Moreover  the  Ministry 
is  responsible  as  a  body,  not  separately;  for  their 
policy  is  the  party  policy,  and  if  the  majority  in  the 
Commons  vote  against  them,  it  means  that  the  house 
wishes  their  party  to  give  up  the  conduct  of  the 


46  The  Legislature 

government.  It  is  understood,  of  course,  that  if  a 
Minister  has  been  guilty  of  misconduct  or  indiscre- 
tion as  an  individual,  he  alone  is  condemned  and 
resigns,  because  no  question  of  the  conduct  of  the 
Cabinet  or  the  policy  of  the  party  is  involved.1 

Appealing  to  the  Country.  In  attempting  to  make 
clear  the  responsibility  of  the  Ministry,  I  have  said 
that  if  they  are  outvoted  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
they  must  resign.  They  may  sometimes  adopt  an- 
other course,  however.  If  they  believe  that  the 
people  are  really  in  sympathy  with  them  and  do 
not  approve  of  the  attempt  of  the  Commons  to  turn 
them  out,  they  may  refuse  to- resign  and  appeal  to 
the  people  by  dissolving  Parliament  and  ordering 
an  election  of  a  new  House  of  Commons.  In  the 
campaign  which  follows,  between  the  dissolution 
and  the  choice  of  the  new  Commons,  the  country 
rings  with  the  speeches  of  Ministers,  their  followers, 
and  opponents,  in  a  mighty  effort  to  secure  a  majority 
in  the  coming  house.  It  is  similar  to  an  election  in 
the  United  States  in  which  a  President  and  a  new 
Congress  are  to  be  chosen. 

If  the  result  of  the  election  is  to  place  in  the 
House  of  Commons  a  majority  belonging  to  the 
party  of  the  Ministry,  the  Ministry  are  sustained 
by  the  people  and  retain  their  positions;  but  if  the 
new  house  is  in  the  control  of  their  opponents,  the 

1  Cf.  pages  126-127. 


The  Cabinet  and  the  Commons       47 

people  have  condemned  them,  and  they  should  re- 
sign immediately  upon  the  announcement  of  the 
result,  as  they  will  otherwise  be  compelled  to  do  as 
soon  as  Parliament  meets. 

Vote  of  Lack  of  Confidence.  The  Ministry  may 
be  turned  out  or  forced  to  appeal  to  the  country,  as 
described  above,  not  only  by  defeating  one  of  their 
measures  before  the  House  of  Commons,  but  also  by 
carrying  a  motion  that  they  no  longer  possess  the 
confidence  of  that  house.  This  motion  can  be  made 
at  any  time  and  must  be  voted  upon  as  soon  as 
reasonable  opportunity  has  been  afforded  each  side 
to  defend  its  position.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  this  is 
the  usual  way  in  which  the  Ministry  is  overthrown 
in  the  Commons,  the  defeat  of  their  bills  being  very 
rare. 

Taking  of  Office  by  a  New  Ministry.  The  Min- 
istry, when  defeated  in  the  House  of  Commons,  or 
in  a  general  election,  wait  upon  the  King  and  sur- 
render their  offices.  The  King  at  once  sends  for  the 
recognized  leader  of  the  new  majority  party,  request- 
ing him  to  call  at  the  palace.  The  gentleman  upon 
his  arrival  is  simply  informed  that,  the  Ministry 
having  resigned,  he,  being  the  recognized  leader  of 
the  majority  party,  will  please  form  a  Ministry. 

There  is  usually  no  doubt  as  to  whom  the  party 
recognizes  as  its  leader,  as  this  is,  except  in  rare 
instances,  determined  by  the  general  consensus  of 


48  The  Legislature 

approval  of  a  chief  who  has  won  his  position  through 
long  parliamentary  service.  A  few  times  it  has  been 
necessary  for  the  members  of  the  party  in  Parliament 
to  determine  in  caucus  whom  they  will  recognize  as 
their  head.  A  chief  once  definitely  accepted  usually 
continues  to  be  recognized  as  such  as  long  as  he  re- 
tains his  health  and  strength. 

It  occasionally  occurs  that  the  pre-eminence  is 
doubtful  between  two  or  three  really  strong  men,  no 
one  of  whom  is  clearly  the  preference  of  the  majority 
of  his  party.  Under  these  circumstances  the  King 
is  free  to  use  his  own  judgment  as  to  which  he  will 
summon.  If,  however,  he  has  been  evidently  mis- 
taken, the  gentleman  himself  will  so  inform  His 
Majesty  and  advise  the  summoning  of  the  one  whom 
he  considers  entitled  to  the  position.  Thus,  e.  g., 
Lord  Hartington  when  requested  by  Queen  Victoria 
in  1880  to  form  a  Ministry  declined  to  do  so  and 
advised  Her  Majesty  to  send  for  Mr.  Gladstone,  as 
the  sovereign  promptly  did.  It  can  hardly  be 
doubted  that  the  Queen  was  somewhat  influenced  by 
her  personal  dislike  for  Mr.  Gladstone  in  this  case, 
as  she  plainly  was  against  another  Liberal  statesman 
in  1855.  On  that  occasion,  after  vainly  trying  in 
succession  to  induce  Lords  Derby,  Lansdowne,  and 
Russell  to  form  a  Ministry,  she  finally  had  to  resort 
to  "her  old  enemy  Palmerston. "  In  both  cases,  of 
course,  the  sovereign  was  obliged  to  yield.  In  the 


The  Cabinet  and  the  Commons       49 

event,  however,  that  a  politician  who  was  not 
acceptable  to  the  Commons  should  obey  the  order 
of  the  King  to  form  a  Ministry,  he  would  soon 
discover  his  mistake;  for  the  leading  politicians 
would  refuse  to  accept  office  under  him,  and  if  he 
should  still  be  so  foolish  as  to  persist,  the  Commons 
would  drive  him  from  office  by  a  vote  of  want  of 
confidence. 

The  Verdict  of  the  People.  It  is  now  a  recognized 
principle  that  the  government  must  be  acceptable 
to  the  people.  Hence,  if  the  new  Ministry  have 
taken  office  in  consequence  of  the  resignation  of 
their  opponents  on  account  of  an  adverse  vote  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  they  will  dissolve  Parliament 
and  order  a  new  election  in  order  to  allow  the  people 
at  once  to  declare  which  of  the  two  parties  they  pre- 
fer to  bear  rule;  and  it  occasionally  happens  that 
the  voters  return  to  power  the  party  of  the  recently 
defeated  Cabinet,  whose  members  thereupon  resume 
office.  This  is  rare,  however;  for  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  more  especially  the  Cabinet,  keep  in 
close  touch  with  public  opinion,  and  if  a  Cabinet  is 
so  far  convinced  of  its  weakness  as  not  to  venture 
an  appeal  to  the  people  when  defeated  in  the  Com- 
mons, it  is  very  likely  correct  in  thinking  that  the 
political  complexion  of  the  country  has  changed. 

If  a  new  Ministry  is  formed  simply  by  redis- 
tributing the  offices  among  the  leaders  of  the  party 


50  The  Legislature 

already  in  power,  the  election  of  a  new  Parliament 
is  not  necessary.  It  must  be  remembered,  however, 
that  in  a  system  whose  operation  depends  in  so 
many  particulars  upon  the  experience,  judgment, 
and  sense  of  propriety  of  the  men  in  charge,  many 
circumstances  arise  for  which  no  set  rule  can  be 
stated.  In  such  a  flexible  system  all  statesmen 
would  act  in  the  same  way  in  the  more  obvious  and 
regular  cases,  though  different  men  might,  without 
being  considered  as  violating  the  constitution,  act 
differently  in  cases  less  clear  and  typical. 

Voluntary  Dissolution  by  the  Cabinet.  Another 
fact  in  connection  with  dissolving  Parliament  may 
be  explained  here.  It  will  be  recalled  that  the 
Commons  are  elected  for  a  term  of  five  years,  but 
are  never  allowed  to  serve  out  the  full  term.  If 
their  term  is  not  ended  by  a  dissolution  for  the  rea- 
son just  described,  they  will  be  dissolved  independ- 
ently of  any  such  crisis  shortly  before  the  expiration 
of  the  five-year  period.  The  Cabinet  of  course 
desire  that  the  election  shall  come  at  a  time  when 
the  people  are  favourably  impressed  with  their 
party ;  and  hence,  as  the  day  draws  near  which  would 
put  an  end  to  the  existing  house,  they  seek  to  hit 
upon  some  such  occasion  to  order  a  new  election  as 
the  successful  termination  of  a  war,  the  passage  of 
some  popular  law,  or  the  appearance  of  favourable 
results  from  some  of  their  measures.  This  may  give 


The  Cabinet  and  the  Commons        51 

the  existing  Ministry  a  certain  unfair  advantage, 
though  one  which  would  be  of  little  help  to  a  weak  or 
really  unpopular  or  unsuccessful  Cabinet;  while  it  is 
undoubtedly  true  that  a  party  would  be  subjected  to 
an  unfair  disadvantage  of  much  more  serious  charac- 
ter by  having  the  election  at  a  certain  fixed  time, 
immediately  before  which  their  opponents,  or  the 
mere  course  of  events,  might  produce  circumstances 
which  would  prejudice  the  people  against  the  govern- 
ment. This  is  frequently  the  case  in  the  United 
States  where  the  fixed  date  for  the  election  not  only 
offers  tempting  opportunities  to  the  party  in  opposi- 
tion, but  also  frequently  deters  the  party  in  power 
from  conducting  the  government  with  an  eye  so 
single  to  the  public  good  as  they  otherwise  would 
do.  The  remark  that  it  is  as  fair  for  one  party  as 
the  other  does  not  dispose  of  the  matter.  The 
principal  question  is,  which  system  is  fairer  and 
better  for  the  people? 

Public  Interest  in  Parliamentary  Proceedings. 
We  can  understand  why  the  public  takes  such  keen 
interest  in  the  debates  in  Parliament;  for  the  vote 
upon  any  question  may  turn  out  the  Ministry,  or  at 
the  least  show  that  it  is  rapidly  approaching  its 
doom.  Politics  in  England  are  a  war  in  which  a 
decisive  battle  may  occur  at  any  time;  while  in  the 
United  States,  no  matter  what  the  President  or  Con- 
gress may  do,  there  is  no  chance  of  getting  them  out 


52  The  Legislature 

until  the  next  election,  and  hence  their  struggles  are 
not  of  such  importance  to  the  contestants  or  of  such 
interest  to  the  voters. 

"  The  Government "  and  Popular  Control.  So 
great  is  the  power  which  rests  with  the  Cabinet  as 
the  responsible  officials  in  control  of  public  policy 
that  they  are  in  fact  spoken  of  as  "the  government." 
As  the  leaders  of  the  political  party  for  the  time 
being  in  power  in  the  country,  they  are  the  dominat- 
ing feature  of  the  House  of  Commons.  This 
concentration  of  authority  and  responsibility  openly 
and  plainly  in  the  hands  of  a  small  united  group 
enables  the  voters  to  perceive  whether  the  party 
pledges  are  being  redeemed  and  the  government 
administered  in  a  proper  manner;,  for  these  twenty 
or  so  men  are  absolutely  responsible  for  the  passage 
of  all  important  laws  and  are  obliged  at  any  time  to 
answer  questions  touching  any  fact  or  feature  of  the 
public  business,  except,  of  course,  such  as  military 
secrets  or  phases  of  foreign  relations  which  cannot 
properly  be  discussed  before  the  world. 

Dominance  of  the  Cabinet.  The  system  involves 
not  only  the  dominance  of  the  Cabinet  over  the  time 
and  business  of  the  House  of  Commons,  as  of  the 
officers  over  a  disciplined  army,  but  also  the  relative 
insignificance  of  the  individual  member.  It  is 
distinctly  a  system  of  brilliant  leaders  and  loyal 
followers.  The  new  man  is  given  a  fair  chance  to 


The  Cabinet  and  the  Commons       53 

show  what  is  in  him;  and  mere  claptrap  or  buncombe 
count  for  little  before  such  judges  as  the  House  of 
Commons ;  but  if  he  proves  to  be  only  a  commonplace 
fellow,  the  public  business  is  not  long  impeded  by  his 
interruptions. 

There  are,  however,  many  men  valuable  in  the 
laborious  duties  of  the  committee  room  who  are 
almost  entirely  unknown  for  anything  they  say  upon 
the  floor  of  the  house  and  are  yet  esteemed  by  those 
who  know  their  work  as  useful  public  servants. 

Yet,  strong  as  is  the  leadership  of  the  Cabinet,  it 
is  by  the  consent  of  the  House  of  Commons,  which 
can  overthrow  the  leaders,  or  indeed  the  whole 
system,  if  it  chooses.  Hence  it  is  an  exaggeration 
to  say  that  the  Cabinet  rules  the  country.  Rather, 
it  administers  the  government  with  firmness  and 
with  independence  from  trivial  interference.  Eng- 
land supplies  the  most  decided  example  of  rule  by 
party,  the  most  perfectly  worked  out  system  of 
personal  and  party  responsibility — a  responsibility 
which  enables  the  House  of  Commons  instantly  to 
call  the  Cabinet  definitely  to  accbunt,  and  the 
country  on  important  occasions  similarly  to  call  to 
account  both  Cabinet  and  Commons. 

Advantages  of  Co-operation  of  Legislature  and 
Executive.  The  advantages  of  the  system  of  re- 
sponsible Ministry  are  great  and  evident;  and  yet 
there  are  also  dangers.  It  seems  to  be  peculiarly 


54  The  Legislature 

suited  to  the  English  who  developed  it,  fitting  them 
like  their  skins  do  their  bodies;  but  in  many  of  the 
countries  which  have  copied  it,  it  has  not  worked 
well.  It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that 
these  are  nations  which  had  previously,  either 
through  lack  of  aptitude  or  of  opportunity,  not  dis- 
played the  highest  ability  in  self-government.  It  is 
easy  to  copy  the  mere  forms  of  a  government,  but  it 
is  not  possible  to  reproduce  the  spirit,  character,  and 
circumstances  out  of  whose  workings  through  the 
centuries  it  has  been  developed. 

The  people  of  the  United  States,  though  deriving 
their  political  and  legal  principles  from  England, 
have  not  adopted  this  parliamentary  system,  as  it  is 
called,  but  have  developed  the  presidential  form.1 
Many  consider  that  with  us  the  English  system 
would  involve  a  dangerous  degree  of  popular  passion, 
political  violence,  and  instability.  It  is  certain, 
however,  that  we  would  be  benefited  by  adopting 
to  a  certain  extent  the  English  principle  of  a  closer 
touch  between  the  executive  and  legislative  branches 
of  the  government,  so  that  each  might  better  under- 
stand and  co-operate  in  the  tasks  for  which  their 
agreement  is  necessary.  Presidents  Washington's, 
Adams's,  and  Wilson's  reading  their  important  mes- 
sages before  Congress  in  person,  as  also  their  freer 
personal  communication  with  the  Senate  on  treaties 

1  See  page  8  above  for  explanation  of  these  terms. 


The  Cabinet  and  the  Commons       55 

and  appointments,  are  efforts  to  avoid  the  great 
disadvantage  in  the  performance  of  the  duties  of 
President  and  Congress  which  has  resulted  from  the 
excessive  separation  of  these  branches  of  our  govern- 
ment— a  separation  that  we  have  allowed  to  extend 
far  beyond  reasonable  degree  and  to  become  almost 
a  binding  custom. 

The  Future  of  Party  Government.  Our  discussion 
has  assumed  the  system  of  parliamentary  govern- 
ment to  be  operating  in  normal  times  of  foreign 
peace  and  party  strife.  The  reader  is  familiar  with 
the  action  not  only  of  England,  but  of  other  parlia- 
mentary countries  also,  during  the  Great  War  of 
putting  party  dissensions  aside  and  forming  a  coali- 
tion Ministry,  without  any  appeal  through  a  new 
election  to  the  people,  from  men  of  both  parties,  so 
that  the  strongest  talents  and  the  patriotic  zeal  of 
all  groups  may  be  brought  into  co-operation  for  the 
common  good  in  a  crisis  so  severely  straining  the 
material  and  moral  resources  of  the  State.  Some 
eminent  English  publicists  prophesy  that  the  waste- 
ful opposition  of  faction  must  be  permanently 
superseded  by  such  a  non-party  system.  As  pleasing 
as  is  such  a  vision  of  a  sort  of  political  millennium, 
human  nature  and  the  experience  of  the  past  hardly 
promise  its  realization.  Even  during  the  American 
Revolution,  as  the  years  wore  on,  two  well-defined 
factions  arose  in  the  Continental  Congress  on  the 


56  The  Legislature 

methods  and  aims  in  the  conduct  of  the  war.  Wash- 
ington hoped  for  a  non-party  administration  under 
the  Constitution,  but  in  vain.  Nor  are  the  present 
coalition  Cabinets  in  Europe  the  first  to  be  formed 
under  similar  circumstances.  In  the  face  of  threat- 
ened destruction  all  factions  unite;  but  the  peril 
passed,  differing  views  of  the  rights  of  classes,  the 
obligations  of  wealth,  and  the  best  means  of  serving 
the  common  good  or  protecting  special  interests 
make  party  divisions  and  party  government  inevita- 
ble. Not  only  so,  but  doubtless  no  other  system 
serves  so  well  to  winnow  good  from  bad  and  modify 
extremes  in  the  formulation  and  administration  of 
laws. 


CHAPTER  V 

ORGANIZATION  AND  WORK  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS. 
— GOVERNMENT  BILLS1 

The  Speech  from  the  Throne.  Just  as  the  Presi- 
dent sends  or  delivers  to  Congress  a  message  at  the 
beginning  of  its  annual  meeting,  reviewing  the  state 
of  the  country  and  recommending  needed  legislation, 
so  the  King,  as  described  above,2  delivers  to  Par- 
liament an  annual  speech  from  the  throne.  The 
American  custom  in  fact  originated  in  imitation  of 
the  British,  with  which  the  founders  of  the  republic 
had  all  their  lives  been  familiar  as  British  subjects. 
Since  the  executive  authority  is  really  in  the  hands 
of  the  Cabinet,  and  the  "  speech  "  is  their  declaration 
of  the  program  of  the  party  in  power,  it  is  written 
by  the  Prime  Minister,  with  the  benefit  of  the  criti- 
cism of  the  Cabinet,  without  any  participation  by 
the  monarch.  Its  importance  may  be  judged  by  the 
fact  that  it  not  only  reviews  the  state  of  foreign  and 

1  Government  bills  are  those  which  are  introduced  by  the  Ministry. 

2  Page  27. 

57 


58  The  Legislature 

domestic  affairs,  but  announces  the  measures  which 
the  Cabinet  propose  to  present  to  Parliament. 

His  Majesty's  speech  is  read  by  him  or  his  re- 
presentative in  person  before  both  houses  assembled 
in  the  House  of  Lords.  On  the  return  of  the  Com- 
mons to  their  chamber,  the  Speaker  reads  a  copy  of 
the  speech  to  his  fellow  commoners,  only  a  portion  of 
whom  probably  had  cared  to  crowd  into  the  small 
chamber  of  the  Lords  and  stand  outside  the  rail, 
as  even  their  Speaker  must  do,  thus  recalling  the 
time  when  the  Commons  were  really  the  "lower" 
house. 

Debate  on  the  Speech  from  the  Throne.  Being 
in  reality  the  platform  of  the  party  in  power,  the 
speech  from  the  throne  is  treated  accordingly.  Its 
consideration  begins  the  work  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. Some  member  selected  for  that  honour  moves 
in  a  few  brief  remarks  that  the  house  thank  His 
Majesty  for  his  most  gracious  speech.  This  is  called 
moving  the  address  in  reply  to  the  speech  from  the 
throne.  The  leader  of  the  Opposition  (i.  e.  the  party 
in  a  minority  in  the  Commons)  rises  and  attacks  the 
King's  speech  with  all  the  vigour  and  venom  with 
which  politicians  are  accustomed  to  denounce  each 
other's  plans.  The  Ministers  of  course  defend  the 
speech.  The  debate  is  perhaps  the  most  general 
one  that  occurs  in  Parliament ;  for  it  ranges  over  the 
entire  policy  of  the  party  in  power,  and  the  general 


The  House  of  Commons  59 

merits  and  demerits  of  its  principles  and  aims.  The 
battle  may  continue  for  ten  or  fifteen  days.  If  the 
motion  to  thank  the  King  is  carried,  the  Ministry 
win;  but  if  an  amendment  is  carried  expressing  regret 
that  some  subject  was  omitted  or  in  any  other  way 
manifesting  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  house,  the 
Ministry  know  that  they  do  not  command  the  sup- 
port of  the  majority,  and  therefore  they  dissolve 
Parliament  and  appeal  to  the  people,  or  resign,  as 
described  in  the  preceding  chapter. 
f  Arrangement  of  Seats.  The  Speaker's  chair  is 
stationed  in  one  end  of  the  small  hall,  measuring 
seventy-five  by  forty-five  feet,  in  which  the  house 
meets.  Except  a  few  seats  in  the  rear  which  are 
placed  across,  the  benches  run  lengthwise  of  the  hall, 
four  rows  on  each  side,  rising  one  above  the  other  so 
that  their  occupants  sit  facing  each  other  with  a 
broad  aisle  between.  The  supporters  of  the  Minis- 
try occupy  the  side  of  the  hall  to  the  Speaker's  right ; 
those  of  the  party  in  opposition,  i.  e.  the  minority, 
the  side  on  his  left.  The  front  bench  on  the  Speaker's 
right  and  nearest  his  chair  is  called  the  Treasury 
bench  and  is  occupied  by  the  Cabinet.  The  one 
opposite  is  called  the  Opposition  bench  and  is  occu- 
pied by  the  late  Ministry  of  the  defeated  party.  The 
supporters  of  the  two  rows  of  opposing  chiefs  are 
arranged  upon  the  benches  behind  the  respective 
groups  of  leaders.  A  member  who  does  not  count 


60  The  Legislature 

himself  a  follower  of  either  party  sits  in  the  rear  of 
the  hall,  "below  the  gangway,"  as  it  is  called. 

Dominant  Position  of  the  Cabinet.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  understand  the  working  of  the  House  of 
Commons  without  keeping  in  mind  the  dominant 
position  of  the  Cabinet.  Since  they  are  held  re- 
sponsible for  all  government  actions,  they  must  be 
allowed  a  very  free  hand  in  shaping  public  policy, 
conducting  the  administration,  and  passing  laws 
through  Parliament.  The  Ministry  in  power  is 
called  "the  government,"  and  to  a  very  consider- 
able extent  it  does  govern.  The  King,  the  nominal 
chief  executive,  is  completely  in  their  hands  and 
does  not  in  any  way  rule  the  country. 

"Government  Bills"  and  "Private  Member 
Bills."  Much  the  greater  part  of  the  time  of  the 
house  is  taken  up  by  the  Ministers  or  by  the  dis- 
cussion of  their  proposals,  "the  government  meas- 
ures." Every  large  body  with  a  great  variety  of 
duties  must  necessarily  assign  many  matters  to 
committees,  and  the  House  of  Commons,  like  all 
modern  legislative  bodies,  also  does  this.  But  the 
committees  do  not  play  any  such  part  in  Parliament 
as  they  do  in  our  Congress,  where  they  perform  prac- 
tically the  bulk  of  the  real  work  of  legislation. 

In  Parliament  all  bills  by  private  members,  with 
few  exceptions,  are  referred  to  a  committee  which 
conducts  the  real  investigation  and  discussion  and 


Government  Bills  61 

recommends  the  house  to  either  kill  or  pass  the 
measure.  But  not  so  the  great  measures  which 
constitute  the  program  of  the  party  in  power. 
These  are  introduced  by  the  Ministers  and  are  dis- 
cussed in  the  meeting  of  the  whole  house,  either  in 
regular  session  or  sitting  as  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole. 

Rules  of  the  House.  The  rules  for  transacting 
business,  though  much  simpler  than  formerly,  are 
so  complex  that  only  a  skilful  parliamentarian  can 
steer  his  way.  They  are  similar  to  those  of  our 
Congress  or  legislatures;  for,  as  one  should  keep  in 
mind,  the  American  system  is  derived  from  the  Eng- 
lish. Though  we  shall,  of  course,  not  trouble  our- 
selves with  the  intricacies  of  parliamentary  practice, 
we  should  understand  clearly  the  following  rules: 

First,  a  bill  must  ordinarily  be  discussed  both  in 
the  regular  session  of  the  house  and  in  committee. 
Remember,  though,  that  in  the  case  of  the  great  gov- 
ernment bills  the  committee  is  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole,  which  is  virtually  the  house  itself.  Second, 
to  become  a  law,  it  must  pass  three  readings  in  both 
houses,  i.  e.  must  be  passed  three  separate  times  in 
each  house. 

First  Reading  of  a  Bill.  The  procedure  upon  a 
bill  is  as  follows:  The  Minister  in  charge  of  the 
department  most  nearly  concerned  with  the  proposed 
law  asks  leave  to  introduce  the  bill.  He  explains 


62  The  Legislature 

the  nature  of  his  measure,  and  a  thorough  debate 
follows  upon  its  outstanding  features  and  general 
principles.  Discussion  at  this  stage  does  not  enter 
upon  minor  details,  nor  are  amendments  now  offered. 
The  house  grants  permission,  and  then  passes  the 
bill  through  its  first  reading. 

If  public  necessity  requires,  a  bill  may  be  passed 
through  all  three  readings  in  one  day;  but  this  is 
very  unusual,  and  practically  always  the  different 
readings  are  separated  by  several  days. 

Second  Reading  and  Discussion  in  Committee. 
On  the  second  reading  the  house  again  considers 
the  bill  upon  its  general  character  and  does  not  allow 
amendment.  Upon  passing  the  second  reading, 
the  bill  goes  to  "the  committee  stage."  It  is  in  the 
detailed  committee  discussion  following  the  second 
reading  that  amendments  are  considered  and  either 
approved  or  rejected  by  the  committee.  After  this 
the  committee  reports  to  the  house,  stating  what 
amendments,  if  any,  it  recommends.  -  The  house 
then  approves  or  rejects  the  amendments  which 
have  been  recommended  by  the  committee;  but  if 
further  amendments  are  desired,  the  bill  must  be 
sent  back  to  the  committee  for  their  consideration. 

Third  Reading  and  the  King's  Signature.  This 
stage  being  completed,  the  house  takes  up  the  ques- 
tion, Shall  the  bill  pass  its  third  reading?  At  this 
stage  the  bill  is  either  killed  as  a  whole  or  passed  as 


Government  Bills  63 

a  whole,  without  further  amendment.  In  the  latter 
case  it  is  sent  to  the  House  of  Lords,  where  it  goes 
through  a  similar  process;  or  if  it  has  already  passed 
the  Lords,  it  is  sent  to  the  King,  who  signs  it,  without 
reference  to  whether  he  likes  it  or  not. 

It  often  occurs  that  one  house  insists  on  amend- 
ments to  which  the  other  is  averse.  If  the  houses 
cannot  agree,  the  entire  bill  fails;  for  it  must  be 
adopted  in  identical  form  by  both.  The  Commons, 
however,  as  explained  above,  have  sole  control  over 
all  money  bills,  and  can  have  their  way  in  any  other 
matter  by  waiting  two  years  and  meantime  passing 
the  measure  twice  more  in  the  form  which  they 
desire. z 

Initiative  Generally  with  the  Commons.  The 
Commons  are  plainly  much  the  more  important  of 
the  two  houses.  The  Lords  in  fact  originate  few 
bills,  but  principally  confine  themselves  to  amending, 
adopting,  or  rejecting  those  sent  up  by  the  other 
branch,  thus  illustrating  their  character  as  "a  cau- 
tious house  of  revision." 

The  Budget.  An  all-important  feature  of  the 
work  of  the  Commons  is  the  passing  of  money  bills. 
Their  customary  control  over  the  raising  and  spend- 
ing of  money  has  been  growing  stronger  for  centuries, 
until  it  was  made  absolute  by  law  by  the  "Parliament 
Act"  of  1911,  as  for  many  years  it  had  been  supposed 

1  See  above,  page  24. 


64  The  Legislature 

to  be  by  long  established  custom.1  In  finance  the 
house  follows  very  closely  the  lead  of  the  Cabinet, 
and  hence  we  must  first  notice  the  part  played  by 
these  officials. 

In  England,  the  minister  of  finance,  called  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  presents  annually  to 
Parliament  a  carefully  balanced  statement  of  the 
amounts  necessary  to  support  the  various  govern- 
ment services  and  an  estimate  of  the  taxes  which 
will  be  required  to  meet  the  total.  This  is  called  the 
budget.  Its  compilation  by  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  will  later  be  described.  The  speech  in 
which  he  introduces  his  budget,  especially  if  he  is  a 
man  of  eloquence  and  genius  like  Gladstone,  is  one 
of  the  great  events  of  the  session. 

As  explained  above,  the  house  discusses  the  details 
of  money  bills  in  Committee  of  the  Whole.  When 
dealing  thus  with  the  appropriation  bills,  it  is  called 
the  Committee  of  the  Whole  on  Supply,  and  when 
dealing  with  the  tax  bills,  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole  on  Ways  and  Means. 

Adjustment  of  Income  and  Outgo.  The  Commons 
have  an  inflexible  rule,  amounting  to  one  of  the 
strongest  customs  of  the  constitution,  that  they  will 
make  no  appropriation  of  money  not  requested  by 
the  Ministers,  that  they  will  increase  no  amount 
above  what  they  recommend,  nor  change  any 

'  Cf.  page  24. 


Government  Bills  65 

amount  requested  for  one  purpose  from  that  purpose 
to  another.  The  house  allows  itself  by  this  rule  to 
reduce  the  amounts  which  the  Ministry  request, 
but  they  rarely  do  so.  A  surer  system  for  repressing 
extravagance,  particularly  for  unjustifiable  purposes 
benefiting  special  localities,  can  hardly  be  imagined. 
" Log-rolling"1  and  irresponsible  expenditure  are 
rendered  well-nigh  impossible. 

Since  the  Cabinet  guide  in  both  the  income  and 
the  expenditures,  they  can  adjust  them  with  such 
remarkable  balance  that  the  difference  is  on  the 
average  only  about  three  and  a  half  per  cent.  Some 
of  our  State  legislatures  seek  to  obtain  system  in 
their  finances  by  employing  the  guiding  hand  of  the 
Committee  on  Ways  and  Means  or  some  similar 
group,  in  both  taxing  and  spending.  In  1915  seven 
States  took  decided  forward  steps  in  budgetary  legis- 
lation, several  giving  strong  leadership  to  the  Gover- 
nor. New  York  City  and  Boston  have  greatly 
improved  their  finances  by  adopting  the  English 
system.  The  lack  of  any  such  arrangement  in 
Congress  is  one  of  the  chief  causes  of  extravagance 
and  of  the  immense  surpluses  or  deficits  which  fre- 


1  Log-rolling  is  the  practice  of  a  member  or  a  group  of  members 
supporting  another  member's  or  group  of  members'  measure  on 
condition  that  the  latter  repay  the  service  by  supporting  the  measures 
of  the  former.  It  is  commonly  resorted  to  in  order  to  secure  the 
passage  of  measures  neither  of  which  could  be  passed  on  its  merits. 
Cf-  page  368. 
5 


66  The  Legislature 

quently  occur  in  the  federal  treasury.  Of  late  years, 
ex-President  Taft  and  other  leading  American  states- 
men have  strongly  urged  the  adoption  by  Congress 
of  some  means  by  which  they  can  transact  the  great 
business  of  taxation  and  expenditure  through  a  bud- 
get which  shall  bring  these  to  a  proper  balance  and 
promote  economical  administration.  An  excellent 
step  was  taken  in  this  direction  by  the  law  of  1909, 
which  authorizes  the  President  to  go  over  the  esti- 
mated expenditures  and  income  and  make  recom- 
mendations for  bringing  them  into  balance.1 

1  Board's  American  Government  and  Politics,  211. 


CHAPTER  VI 

ORGANIZATION  AND  WORK  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS 
—PRIVATE  BILLS  AND  PRIVATE  MEMBER  BILLS 

Distinction  between  Private  Bills  and  Private 
Member  Bills.  Having  examined  the  procedure  of 
the  House  of  Commons  in  dealing  with  the  great 
measures  introduced  by  the  Ministry  and  known  as 
"government  bills,"  we  shall  seek  in  this  chapter  to 
understand,  first,  the  procedure  on  private  bills  and 
private  member  bills,  and  second,  the  system  of 
committees  which  largely  attend  to  these  matters. 

First,  as  to  the  distinction  between  public  bills  and 
private  bills.  A  public  bill  is  one  that  is  of  general 
interest  and  operation  and  applies  to  the  whole 
country,  or  such  portions  of  it  as  fall  within  its  pro- 
visions. A  public  bill  may  be  introduced  either  by  a 
Minister,  in  which  case  it  is  called  a  government  bill, 
or  by  a  private  member,  in  which  case  it  is  called  a 
private  member  bill.  A  private  member  bill  thus 
may  be  as  really  public  in  character  as  one  intro- 
duced by  the  Prime  Minister  himself.  Few  public 

67 


68  The  Legislature 

bills  are  introduced  by  private  members,  however, 
for  the  reason  that  the  system  of  a  responsible 
Ministry  leaves  them  small  chance  of  passing.  About 
forty  government  bills  annually  become  law  and 
about  ten  or  fifteen  private  member  bills,  and  few 
of  these  are  on  subjects  which  arouse  argument. x 

Private  Bills.  A  private  bill  on  the  other  hand  is 
one  which  deals  with  some  particular  person  or 
persons  or  some  particular  place,  as,  e.  g.,  granting  a 
group  of  men  the  right  to  build  a  trolley  line  along 
certain  roads  or  streets,  or  empowering  a  city  to 
acquire  the  ownership  of  its  water  works. 

It  is  largely  for  attending  to  private  bills  and 
private  member  bills  that  the  committees  exist. 
Besides  the  Committee  of  the  Whole,  which  is  not 
strictly  a  committee  at  all,  the  Commons  have  select 
committees  and  standing  committees. 

Select  Committees.  A  select  committee  consists 
usually  of  about  fifteen  members,  and  is  appointed 
to  investigate,  consider,  or  report  upon  some  special 
subject  or  bill.  All  sides  of  a  measure  can  be  more 
freely  and  thoroughly  discussed  in  such  a  small 
body.  If  it  is  made  up  of  capable  and  fair-minded 
men  from  both  sides,  Parliament  can  usually  rely 
with  safety  upon  its  judgment  and  accept  its  recom- 
mendations, thus  saving  the  time  of  the  whole  body 
for  matters  of  larger  importance. 

1  Lowell,  i.,  314,  356. 


Private  and  Private  Member  Bills     69 

Committee  Work  on  Private  Bills.  Private  bills 
are  of  course  introduced  by  some  private  member; 
but  we  must  keep  in  mind,  as  explained  above, x  how 
they  differ  from  private  member  bills.  A  private 
bill  is  considered  by  a  small  committee  of  disinterested 
members,  who  conduct  a  hearing  very  much  of  the 
nature  of  a  trial  between  the  persons  who  desire  the 
bill  to  pass  and  those  who  consider  it  contrary  to 
their  interests.  Lawyers  present  the  two  sides,  and 
the  expenses  are  quite  heavy,  which  often  works 
injustice  to  the  poor.  The  advantage  of  the  system 
is  that  it  puts  private  bills  upon  the  basis  of  their 
merits,  as  in  a  court  of  law,  and  prevents  that 
reproach  to  American  legislatures  known  as  "log- 
rolling."2 Parliament  generally  follows  the  advice 
of  the  committee  in  passing  or  rejecting  private  bills. 

The  Lords  and  Private  Bills.  In  view  of  the  fact 
that  the  Lords  do  not  discuss  financial  measures  and 
in  fact  allow  a  great  deal  of  other  legislation  to  pass 
without  opposition,  they  have  more  time  for  private 
bills;  and  it  is  generally  recognized  that  their  services 
in  thoroughly  sifting  these  applications  in  their 
passage  through  their  house  are  of  great  value  in 
protecting  the  interests  of  the  public.  The  Parlia- 
ment Act  of  1911  limiting  their  powers  as  to  public 
bills  does  not  apply  to  private  bills,  and  so  leaves 

1  Page  67. 

1  For  meaning  of  log-rolling,  see  page  65,  note. 


70  The  Legislature 

their  authority  in  regard  to  these  as  large  as  that  of 
the  House  of  Commons.1 

Standing  Committees.  The  standing  committees 
are  four  in  number.  They  consist  of  from  sixty  to 
eighty  members  each,  chosen  from  the  parties  in  the 
House  of  Commons  as  nearly  as  possible  in  proportion 
to  their  relative  numbers.  They  are  intended  in  fact 
to  be  miniatures  of  the  house  and  to  save  its  time 
by  threshing  out  the  discussion  and  amendment  of  a 
large  number  of  bills. 

The  Committee  of  Selection.  Most  of  the  com- 
mittees are  appointed  by  a  small  committee  consist- 
ing of  eleven  members  called  the  Committee  of 
Selection,  which  is  itself  elected  by  the  house  at  the 
beginning  of  each  session.  Its  members  are  in  fact, 
however,  chosen  in  accordance  with  the  wishes  of  the 
heads  of  the  two  parties  in  the  house  and  so  consist 
of  representatives  of  both  parties,  with  a  majority 
belonging  to  the  party  in  control. 

Necessity  of  Committees.  All  this  serves  to  il- 
lustrate how  the  pressure  of  a  vast  amount  of  busi- 
ness has  continually  reduced  the  freedom  of  the 
house  as  a  whole.  In  order  to  cope  with  its  duties 
it  has  been  obliged  to  delegate  much  of  its  work  to  its 
committees  and  much  of  its  authority  and  leadership 
to  the  Cabinet,  so  that  the  Ministry  has  become  more 
important  and  influential  than  ever.  Every  large 

1  See  page  24  and  note. 


Private  and  Private  Member  Bills     71 

modern  legislative  body  has  had  to  economize  its 
time  and  energy  in  some  such  way;  and  the  English 
are  satisfied  that  their  method  of  concentrating 
power  and  responsibility  in  the  hands  of  a  small 
group  standing  in  the  light  of  constant  public  interro- 
gation and  criticism  supplies  the  best  means  by  which 
government  may  be  made  efficient  without  being 
allowed  to  escape  from  popular  control. 


CHAPTER  VII 

CUSTOMS  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS 

A  Real  Deliberative  Assembly.  "The  mother  of 
Parliaments"  has  some  peculiar  and  interesting 
ways  all  her  own.  But  before  taking  up  these  let  us 
emphasize  the  fact  that  the  House  of  Commons  and 
the  House  of  Lords  are  true  deliberative  assemblies. 
There  is  a  strong  tendency  for  a  large  body  to  become 
a  mere  machine  for  registering  the  decrees  of  a  ring 

of  leaders  or  a  set  of  committees.    That  such  has  not 

i~  •"  .       '' 

been  the  fate  of  Parliament  is  largely  due  to  the  fact 
that  it  is  not  overwhelmed  with  the  thousands  of 
bills  which  crush  the  freedom  of  debate  out  of  some 
legislatures.  The  number  of  bills  introduced  annu- 
ally into  the  House  of  Commons  is  only  from  350 
to  500;  and  among  these,  some  40  or  50  great  gov- 
ernment bills  consume  very  much  of  the  time  of 
the  whole  house,  the  detailed  discussion  of  the  others 
being  disposed  of  in  the  committees.  The  number  of 
bills  introduced  into  the  American  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives averages  over  10,000  a  year.  During 

72 


Customs  of  the  House  of  Commons    73 

the  two  years'  duration  of  the  Fifty-ninth  Congress 
there  were  passed  692  public  and  6940  private 
bills,  the  latter  principally  private  pension  bills  to 
place  names  upon  the  rolls  which  could  not  meet 
the  requirements  of  the  pension  law.1 

The  small  size  of  the  chamber,  both  of  the  Lords 
and  of  the  Commons,  in  which  a  member  may  easily 
be  heard  in  a  conversational  tone,  favours  serious 
and  effective  discussion.  As  Lord  Bryce  remarks 
regarding  immense  legislative  halls  capable  of  seating 
vast  throngs  of  visitors,  it  is  hard  to  talk  sound  sense 
at  the  top  of  one's  voice. 

Applause  and  Disapproval.  Applause  and  dis- 
approval are  expressed  in  Parliament  by  cries  of 
"Hear!  hear!" — an  expression,  as  has  been  said, 
capable  of  varying  from  thunderous  cheers  of 
approval  to  the  most  contemptuous  sarcasm. 

Another  custom  of  the  Commons  is  that  of  "  cough- 
ing down"  a  tiresome  speaker.  A  new  member  is 
given  a  fair  opportunity,  and  is  even  generously 
encouraged  if  he  appears  earnest  and  capable;  but 
if  he  is  foolish  or  pompous,  he  soon  finds  that  his 
attempts  to  exhibit  his  talents  are  extinguished  amid 
a  chorus  of  coughs  and  hoots.  It  is  related  of  Dis- 
raeli that  he  was  coughed  down  when  he  attempted 
his  first  speech,  and  that  he  sat  down  with  the  remark, 
"The  time  will  come  when  you  will  hear  me!  "  And 

1  Beard's  American  Government  and  Politics,  271. 


74  The  Legislature 

it  did;  for  his  brilliancy  and  persistence  finally  made 
him  a  Prime  Minister  upon  whose  words  the  world 
hung  with  intense  interest. 

It  can  easily  be  understood  why  experienced 
members  speak  of  the  Commons  as  both  the  most 
trying  and  the  most  sympathetic  audience  in  the 
world.  It  is  a  body  before  which  the  most  experi- 
enced parliamentarian  appears  with  a  certain  awe. 
John  Bright  said,  after  his  fame  as  an  orator 
had  become  world-wide,  that  he  never  rose  to  ad- 
dress the  house  without  his  knees  knocking  to- 
gether. 

In  the  face  of  a  regularly  tiresome  speaker  the 
members  simply  walk  out  as  soon  as  he  begins;  so 
that  such  a  one  may  acquire  the  name  of  "the  dinner 
bell"  from  the  promptness  with  which  he  empties 
the  benches. 

"  Naming "  a  Member.  A  peculiar  custom  in 
connection  with  the  Speaker's  extensive  power  in  pre- 
serving order  is  "naming"  a  member.  If  a  member 
so  far  forgets  parliamentary  decorum  as  to  use  offen- 
sive language  and  refuse  to  withdraw  it,  or  to  persist 
in  disorder,  the  Speaker  makes  one  or  two  courteous 
appeals  to  his  sense  of  propriety.  If  this  fails,  he  says, 
"Then  I  name  you,  Mr.  Blank."  Immediately  the 
government  leader,  or  in  his  absence  the  senior 
Minister  present,  rises  and  moves  that  the  member 
be  indefinitely  suspended.  The  motion  is  always 


Customs  of  the  House  of  Commons    75 

carried.  Reinstatement  follows  after  a  time  propor- 
tionate to  the  gravity  of  the  offence. 

Stopping  a  Member's  Remarks.  The  Speaker  may 
stop  a  member  because  of  his  remarks  being  entirely 
off  the  question  under  discussion  or  because  of  his 
merely  repeating  virtually  the  same  thing  with  the 
evident  intention  of  delaying  business. 

Hats.  Except  when  speaking,  or  during  prayers, 
and  on  a  few  ceremonial  occasions,  the  members  wear 
their  hats;  and  sometimes,  it  might  be  remarked,  an 
embarrassed  inexperienced  speaker  creates  the  chief 
part  of  his  impression  upon  the  house  by  sitting  down 
on  his  tall  silk  headpiece  after  finishing  his  remarks. 

Closing  Debate.  The  cloture  rule  of  the  Commons, 
is  rather  strict,  as  in  the  American  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives. In  a  body  of  such  size  it  is  essential  to 
fix  the  time  at  which  debate  must  stop  and  a  vote 
be  taken.  The  absence  of  such  a  rule  in  the  Lords 
and  in  our  Senate  has  often  been  abused  by  the  minor- 
ity in  order  to  prevent  a  vote's  being  taken  on  a 
measure  favoured  by  a  majority  of  both  houses.1 
"Talking  a  bill  to  death, "  as  it  is  called,  might  some- 
times be  justifiable,  as  any  other  desperate  means 
of  defence  in  the  presence  of  a  public  peril  threatened 
by  an  ignorant  or  corrupt  majority;  but  its  employ- 
ment except  for  some  such  extraordinary  purpose  is 

1  In  March,  1917,  the  Senate  adopted  a  rule  by  which  a  two- 
thirds  vote  may  close  debate. 


76  The  Legislature 

contrary  to  the  principles  both  of  democracy  and 
good  government. 

The  Whips.  Among  the  most  interesting  officers 
in  the  conduct  of  the  British  government  are  the 
whips,  although  they  have  no  part  in  shaping  legisla- 
tion or  executing  the  law,  and  do  not  even  take  part 
in  debate.  The  fact  that  an  adverse  vote  in  the 
House  of  Commons  on  any  except  some  insignificant 
matter  would  require  the  Ministry  to  resign,  or  else 
appeal  to  the  country,  makes  it  necessary  always  to 
have  on  hand  more  of  the  supporters  of  the  govern- 
ment than  of  the  opposition.  To  secure  this  is  the 
principal  duty  of  the  whips. J  Both  sides  have  whips, 
the  Ministry  four  and  the  opposition  three.  The 
chief  ministerial,  or  government  whip,  holds  an 
official  position  without  duties  as  Patronage  Secre- 
tary, or  Parliamentary  Secretary,  of  the  Treasury, 
with  a  salary  of  £2000.  His  three  assistant  whips 
hold  sinecures  as  Junior  Lords  of  the  Treasury  with 
salaries  of  £1000.  They  are  counted  among  the 
Ministry,  but  are  not  in  the  Cabinet. 

Duties  of  the  Whips.  The  chief  whip  particularly 
must  be  a  man  of  strong  personality,  popularity,  and 

1  The  name  is  from  the  whippers-in  at  a  fox  chase,  whose  duty  is  to 
keep  the  dogs  from  wandering  off  the  trail.  Of  recent  years  the 
parties  in  the  American  Congress  are  beginning  to  employ  certain 
members  in  very  much  the  same  task,  though  in  our  system  of 
government  their  duties,  though  very  useful,  cannot  be  of  the  same 
importance  as  those  of  the  English  whips,  on  whose  efficiency  the 
life  of  the  Ministry  may  depend. 


Customs  of  the  House  of  Commons    77 

high  social  position,  in  order  the  better  to  exercise 
pressure  in  keeping  the  party  members  in  good 
discipline.  He  must  know  the  disposition  and  ten- 
dencies of  every  member  of  his  party  and  must  keep 
the  Prime  Minister  informed  of  all  undercurrents 
of  feeling  in  the  house.  Another  important  duty  is 
to  keep  the  members  true  to  party  interests,  and  to 
persuade  or  intimidate  any  one  who  threatens  to 
desert. 

,The  word  whip  is  also  used  for  the  written  notes 
sent  out  by  the  chief  whip  to  every  member  of  the 
party,  requesting  them  to  be  present  at  such  and 
such  times  in  order  to  vote  upon  important  questions. 
The  words  of  these  brief  notices  are  underlined  in 
proportion  to  their  urgency;  and  a  member  who  dis- 
regards a  "five  line  whip, "  as  the  most  pressing  ones 
are  called,  suffers  grave  discredit  from  his  associates. 

"  Division."  In  votes  on  important  motions,  it  is 
common,  when  the  Speaker  announces  that  the  ayes 
(or  noes,  as  the  case  may  be)  have  it,  for  some  mem- 
ber on  the  losing  side  to  shout,  "Division,"  i.e.  to 
call  for  an  actual  count.  This  serves  the  same  pur- 
pose as  the  American  custom  of  demanding  the  yeas 
and  nays,  as  the  members  are  not  only  counted,  but 
are  taken  down  by  name  according  to  their  votes. 

On  a  member's  demanding  a  division,  a  two- 
minute  sandglass  is  turned  and  electric  bells  are  set 
ringing  in  every  part  of  the  building.  Members  rush 


78  The  Legislature 

in  from  the  dining-rooms,  terrace,  library,  lobbies, 
etc.,  and  with  the  dropping  of  the  last  grain  in  the 
little  glass  the  doors  are  locked.  The  Speaker  says, 
"Ayes  to  the  right;  noes  to  the  left,"  and  the  mem- 
bers file  into  the  rooms  called  "division  lobbies"  on 
the  sides  of  the  chamber.  Those  not  desiring  to  vote 
retire  to  the  room  behind  the  Speaker. 

Whips  as  Tellers.  If  the  vote  is  one  which  con- 
cerns the  measures  of  the  Ministry,  or  if  the  opposi- 
tion wishes  to  make  it  a  test  of  strength,  either  side 
requests  the  Speaker  to  appoint  whips  as  tellers,  and 
this  indicates  to  every  member  that  he  is  expected 
to  vote  with  his  party.  Otherwise  everyone  is  free 
to  vote  as  he  pleases. 

Counting  the  Vote.  The  chamber  being  empty,  a 
pair  of  tellers  (each  pair  consisting  of  one  man  from 
each  party)  take  their  stand  at  the  doors  of  the 
division  lobbies  and  count  the  members  as  they  pass 
back  into  the  chamber.  The  four  tellers  then  march 
up  the  entire  length  of  the  hall  to  the  Speaker's  chair 
to  announce  the  vote,  the  tellers  for  the  winners 
marching  on  the  right.  When  the  tellers  for  the 
opposition  are  seen  on  that  side,  indicating  that  the 
Ministry  have  been  defeated,  the  shouts  that  rend 
the  air  are  such  as  would  burst  forth  in  America  if 
the  result  of  a  Presidential  election  could  be  an- 
nounced in  an  equally  sudden  and  dramatic  manner 
before  the  most  intensely  interested  audience  in  the 


Customs  of  the  House  of  Commons    79 

nation.  For,  although  the  Ministry  may  triumph  at 
the  general  election  which  must  follow,  probably  it 
will  not,  and  there  will  be  a  fallen  Ministry  and  a 
change  of  the  party  in  control  of  the  government. 

Standing  Vote.  A  division  requires  a  little  over 
ten  minutes,  but  is  probably  the  quickest  method  of 
taking  a  test  vote.  If  the  Speaker  thinks  that  it  is 
demanded  frivolously  or  merely  for  delay,  he  may 
refuse  it  and,  instead,  count  the  ayes  and  noes  by  a 
standing  vote. 

Re-election  of  a  Member  who  Accepts  a  Minister- 
ship.  A  rule  going  back  to  the  times  when  the  King 
sought  to  control  Parliament  is  that  when  a  member 
of  the  House  of  Commons  is  appointed  a  Minister, 
he  must  resign  his  seat  and  submit  himself  for  re- 
election, and  thus  obtain  the  approval  of  his  con- 
stituents to  his  connection  with  the  court.  He  is  now 
hardly  ever  opposed  for  re-election,  and  indeed  the 
reason  for  the  rule  has  ceased  with  the  disappearance 
of  the  power  of  the  King.  It  was  very  sensibly  dis- 
pensed with  on  the  organization  of  the  new  Ministry 
in  December,  1916,  and  might  very  well  be  per- 
manently abandoned. 

Warden  of  the  Chiltern  Hundreds.  A  rule  going 
back  to  the  Middle  Ages,  when  it  was  difficult  to 
induce  men  to  incur  the  expense  and  danger  of  leaving 
their  homes  unprotected,  travelling  the  robber- 
infested  highways,  and  accepting  the  loss  incident 


8o  The  Legislature 

to  the  neglect  of  their  affairs,  is  that  a  member  may 
not  resign.  There  is  a  way  of  escape,  however. 
None  of  the  King's  officers,  except  Ministers,  naval 
and  army  officers,  and  a  few  others,  may  legally  sit 
in  the  Commons.  Hence,  if  a  member  accepts  such 
an  appointment,  his  seat  is  thereby  vacated.  In 
bygone  days  the  hills  to  the  north-west  of  London 
known  as  the  Chiltern  Hundreds  were  so  plagued 
with  highwaymen  that  the  King  appointed  to  check 
them  a  special  officer  called  the  Warden  of  the  Chil- 
tern Hundreds.  Though  the  occasion  for  his  duties 
has  long  since  passed,  the  position  is  still  retained,  in 
order  that  a  member  of  the  Commons  wishing  to 
retire  may  at  his  request  be  appointed  to  that  office. 
He  holds  it  for  one  day,  and  then  resigns  it  in  order 
that  it  may  be  available  for  any  other  member  who 
may  wish  to  retire.  This  is  very  queer,  but  not  more 
so  than  the  law  in  some  American  States  of  asking  an 
accused  person  at  his  trial,  "How  will  you  be  tried?" 
simply  because  in  England  seven  hundred  years  ago 
he  had  the  right  of  choice  between  ordeal  (the  judg- 
ment of  God)  and  jury  (the  judgment  of  his  country- 
men). Now  he  answers  this  useless  question,  "By 
God  and  my  country";  but  would  it  make  any  dif- 
ference if  he  made  some  other  choice? 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  HOUSE  OF  LORDS 

Ancient  Origin  of  the  House  of  Lords.  Though 
the  House  of  Lords  has  come  to  have  far  less  power, 
it  has  a  much  longer  history,  than  the  House  of 
Commons;  and  in  the  days  when  the  latter  was  young- 
and  weak,  the  Lords  nobly  championed  not  only 
their  own  privileges,  but  on  many  occasions  the 
liberties  of  all  England. 

In  a  sense,  the  House  of  Lords  (or  House  of  Peers, 
as  it  is  also  called)  is  descended  from  the  legislative 
council  and  supreme  court  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  kings, 
the  Witenagemot,  or  meeting-of-the-wise-men.  A 
sharp  break  was  occasioned  by  the  virtual  passing 
away  of  this  ancient  body  and  the  creation  of  a  new 
set  of  lords  by  the  Norman  conquest.  From  that 
time,  however,  there  is  a  steady  development  from 
the  Great  Council  of  the  Norman  kings — the  ad- 
visers whom  those  sovereigns  regarded  or  overrode 
as  they  saw  fit — on  through  the  mighty  barons  who 
deposed  rulers  and  browbeat  Commons,  to  the  pre- 
sent condition,  when  they  are  again  merely  the  ad- 
visers of  the  new  sovereign,  the  people,  who,  as  the 
6  81 


82  The  Legislature 

sovereigns  of  old  did,   override  them  when  they 
choose. 

Composition  of  the  House  of  Lords.  The  House 
of  Lords  is  made  up  of  several  different  elements. 
First,  it  includes  all  hereditary  English  nobles.1 
These  constitute  about  seven  eighths  of  the  whole 
number.  Second,  there  are  sixteen  elected  from 
their  own  number  by  the  Scotch  peers  every  time 
there  is  an  election  of  a  new  House  of  Commons. 
These  are  called  Scotch  representative  peers  and  sit 
in  the  House  of  Lords  only  for  the  Parliament  to 
which  they  were  elected.  Third,  there  are  twenty- 
eight  elected  for  life  from  their  own  number  by  the 
Irish  nobility.  These  are  called  Irish  representative 
peers.  Fourth,  the  two  archbishops  and  twenty- 
four  of  the  bishops  of  the  Church  of  England  hold 
seats  in  the  House  of  Lords.  And  fifth,  there  are 
four  Lords  of  Appeal  in  Ordinary,  to  perform  certain 
duties  to  be  described  later;  for  the  House  of  Lords, 
from  the  dim  ages  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Witenagemot, 
has  been  the  supreme  court  of  appeal  in  England. 
These  four  "law  lords"  hold  their  positions,  like 

1  To  be  strictly  accurate  we  must  state  that  these,  who  are  here 
called  briefly  English  peers,  are  themselves  of  three  classes:  First, 
English  peers  created  before  the  union  of  England  and  Scotland  in 
1707,  i.  e.  those  whose  title  was  created  before  that  time;  second, 
peers  of  Great  Britain,  created  between  1707  and  the  union  of  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland  into  the  United  Kingdom  in  1801;  and  third, 
peers  created  since  that  time.  About  three  fourths  of  the  peerages 
have  been  created  since  1800. 


The  House  of  Lords  83 

other  judges,  during  good  behaviour,  which  practi- 
cally means  for  life,  and  meanwhile  enjoy  all  the 
privileges  of  their  fellow-peers,  but  they  do  not 
transmit  their  positions  or  titles  to  their  sons.  They 
may  resign  or  be  deprived  of  their  offices  in  the  same 
way  as  other  judges.  In  that  case,  they  would  also 
lose  their  membership  in  the  House  of  Lords,  though 
not  their  titles.  The  bishops  are  in  these  regards 
in  the  same  situation.1  The  total  membership  of  the 
house  varies,  both  on  account  of  peerages  becoming 
vacant  by  lords  dying  without  male  heirs,  or  with 
only  minor  male  heirs,  and  on  account  of  new  cre- 
ations. In  1917  the  total  number  was  about  643. 

Ranks  in  the  Peerage.  There  are  five  grades  of 
peers,  in  descending  scale  of  honour  as  follows,  the 
number  in  each  in  1917  being  indicated  by  the  figures 
in  parentheses:  dukes  (21),  marquises  (26),  earls 
(121),  viscounts  (46),  barons  (356).  A  duke  is 
always  referred  to  by  his  title;  marquises  and  earls 
often  so,  while  the  lower  ranks  are  generally  spoken 
of  simply  as  Lord  Tennyson,  e.  g.,  or  Lord  Bacon.2 

1  Though  there  are  thirty-four  bishops  of  the  established  church 
(besides  the  two  archbishops)  in  England,  only  the  archbishops  and 
twenty-four  of  the  bishops  sit  in  the  House  of  Lords.    When  a  bishop 
in  the   house  dies,  the  one  without  a  seat  who  has  been  longest  a 
bishop  becomes  a  member  in  his  place.     But  the  archbishops  of 
Canterbury  and  York  and  the  bishops  of  London,  Winchester,  and 
Durham  are  always  members  of  the  house.     No  Scotch,  Irish,  or 
Welsh  bishop  has  a  seat  in  the  Lords. 

2  The  above  figures  include  only  the  peers  having  seats  in  Parlia- 
ment.    There   are   besides    19  Scottish  and  59  Irish  peers  not  in 


84  The  Legislature 

Wealth  of  the  Lords.  The  wealth  of  the  nobles  is 
very  great,  and  varies  as  a  rule  directly  as  their 
rank.  Besides  their  immense  property  in  commercial 
and  industrial  enterprises,  they  own  almost  a  third 
of  the  cultivated  land  of  the  United  Kingdom  and 
over  one  fourth  of  all  the  land,  and  exercise  thereby 
a  vast  influence  and  'draw  a  stupendous  revenue 
from  the  industry  of  their  fellow-subjects.  This 
constitutes  the  real  basis  of  their  power,  and  is  a  far 
greater  impediment  to  democratic  ideals  than  every- 
thing else  connected  with  their  order. 

The  Character  of  the  Lords.  We  have  spoken  of 
the  fact  that  three  fourths  of  the  existing  peerages 
have  been  created  since  1800.  The  King  is  called 
"the  fountain  of  honour,"  and  as  such  confers 
titles,  medals,  or  other  honours  for  eminent  public 
service  of  any  kind;  but  the  real  authority  is  of 
course  exercised  by  the  Prime  Minister.  Thus  titles 
of  nobility  have  been  conferred  on  many  great  sol- 
diers, such  as  Wellington,  Nelson,  and  Roberts;  on 
great  authors,  as  Tennyson  and  Macaulay;  on  great 


Parliament,  besides    24  ladies   who  are  peeresses  in    their  own 
right. 

The  place  name  in  a  nobleman's  title  no  longer  necessarily 
implies  any  connection  between  him  and  that  locality,  though  it 
does  sometimes  indicate  that  the  man  upon  whom  it  was  originally 
conferred  won  distinction  there,  as  Lord  Kitchener  of  Khartum,  or 
Lord  Roberts  of  Kandahar — places  at  which  they  won  brilliant 
victories  for  which  they  were  given  the  title.  It  has  been  centuries 
since  the  title  indicated  any  governmental  authority  over  the  region. 


The  House  of  Lords  85 

scientists,  as  Kelvin  and  Lister;  on  eminent  men  of 
business  whose  work  has  been  particularly  useful  to 
the  nation,  as  Lord  Strathcona  and  Baron  Roths- 
child; on  great  statesmen,  as  Chatham  and  Beacons- 
field;  on  great  colonial  administrators,  as  Lord  Clive 
and  Earl  Cromer.  It  would  be  a  great  mistake  to 
regard  the  British  peerage  as  a  collection  of  fossils  or 
degenerates.  It  is  true  that,  although  probably  most 
peers  were  originally  made  such  for  some  brilliant 
service,  many  of  their  descendants  are  in  no  wise 
distinguished ;  and  it  is  also  true  that  in  past  ages  the 
honour  often  went  to  mere  royal  favourites,  and  in 
some  instances  to  depraved  characters  on  account 
of  some  disgraceful  connection  with  the  King.  Some, 
too,  are  even  to  this  day  given  a  coronet  for  no  good 
reason  except  that  they  are  very  rich  and  contribute 
liberally  to  the  campaign  fund  of  the  party  whose 
leader  as  Prime  Minister  is  responsible  for  the  con- 
ferring of  the  honour.  This  sounds  very  bad;  but 
before  expressing  too  severely  our  virtuous  republi- 
can indignation,  let  us  ask  ourselves  whether  a  man 
ever  became  a  Senator  or  Governor  or  Vice-President 
in  the  United  States  for  similar  reasons.  But  taken 
all  in  all,  the  peers,  on  account  of  the  wide  distribu- 
tion of  titles  in  many  lines  of  honourable  service, 
and  the  traditions  of  their  order,  comprise  a  remark- 
ably large  proportion  of  able  and  high-minded  men. 
Probably  no  other  class  of  very  rich  men  anywhere 


86  The  Legislature 

in  the  world  sends  such  a  large  proportion  of  its 
members  into  useful  public  service.1 

It  may  well  be  doubted  whether  the  British  people 
would  have  allowed  the  House  of  Lords  to  continue 
to  exist  but  for  the  constant  refreshing  it  has  re- 
ceived from  the  best  blood  of  the  nation  in  a  real 
instead  of  a  merely  conventional  sense.  The  hope 
of  winning  a  peerage,  or  at  least  a  baronetcy,  is  a 
powerful  impulse  in  leading  thousands  of  brilliant 
young  men  to  put  forth  their  best  efforts  to  rise  to 
eminence  in  their  professions  or  the  government 
service.  The  descendants  of  the  men  who  win  their 
titles  often  turn  out  commonplace,  despite  the  fact 
that  "blood  will  tell."  The  Chinese  have  sought  to 
gain  the  advantages  of  class  distinction  and  yet 
counteract  this  defect  by  providing  that  a  title  of 
nobility  shall  expire  after  a  certain  number  of 
generations,  according  to  the  merit  of  the  original 
holder.  Other  nations  seek  to  avoid  the  evils  of 
hereditary  aristocracy  and  yet  gain  the  benefits 
arising  from  stimulated  ambition  by  bestowing  life 
membership  in  such  bodies  as,  e.  g.,  the  "forty 
immortals"  of  France.  It  can  hardly  be  doubted 
that  the  American  spirit  which  makes  a  man  even 
of  great  distinction  prefer  plain  "Mister"  to  any 
title,  even  bestowed  for  merit,  assures  a  freedom 
from  false  valuations,  flunkeyism,  and  social  hypo- 

1  Cf.  Moran's  English  Government,  176. 


The  House  of  Lords  87 

crisy  which  far  outweighs  any  advantages  that  flow 
from  hereditary  class  distinctions. 

Popularity  of  the  Lords.  Strange  as  it  may  seem 
to  an  American,  who  often  observes  that  aristocratic 
connections  are  a  hindrance  to  political  success,  the 
people  of  England  look  upon  the  peers,  if  men  of  real 
ability  and  public  spirit,  as  among  the  safest  and 
most  popular  guides  in  politics.  This  is  because  they 
are  not  pursuing  special  favours  in  legislation,  as  ship- 
owners, manufacturers,  or  other  business  men  often 
do ;  because  they  are  rich  enough  not  to  need  to  be  self- 
seeking,  and  because  the  eminence  of  their  hereditary 
position  is  such  that  they  can  view  public  employment 
and  affairs  without  being  blinded  by  the  glamour  of 
office  or  subdued  by  the  necessities  of  salary. 

Privileges  and  Disadvantages  of  the  Lords.  The 
lords  are  under  a  very  serious  disadvantage  in  not 
being  allowed  to  sit  in  the  House  of  Commons;  and 
of  course  they  cannot  vote  for  members.  Now  that 
that  body  has  come  to  be  the  real  government,  this 
prevents  some  brilliant  careers.  Neither  can  a  lord, 
except  through  an  act  of  Parliament,  resign  his 
lordship;  for  he  is  born  a  peer  as  another  man  is  a 
commoner. 

The  peers  enjoy,  of  course,  the  highest  social 
privileges.  Besides  occupying  a  pre-eminent  posi- 
tion at  all  times,  they  are  conspicuous  at  coronations, 
royal  weddings,  and  court  functions.  Their  legal 


88  The  Legislature 

privileges  now  amount  to  so  little  as  to  be  a  poor 
compensation  for  their  legal  disabilities.  A  peer  may 
at  any  time  demand  admission  to  the  sovereign  as 
one  of  his  ancient  constitutional  advisers;  but  this 
amounts  to  nothing,  as  the  King  is  now  entirely  in 
the  hands  of  the  Cabinet.  Every  person  is  entitled 
to  a  trial  by  his  "peers,"  i.  e.  his  legal  equals,  and 
hence  a  lord  or  his  wife,  or  his  widow  if  she  has  not 
forfeited  the  privilege  by  marrying  a  commoner, 
may  be  tried  for  treason  or  felony  only  before  the 
Lords;  but  for  misdemeanors  he  is  tried  before  a 
magistrate  or  jury  like  any  other  Englishman.  In 
either  case,  if  found  guilty,  he  is  given  the  same  pun- 
ishment as  a  commoner.  The  indictment  is  by  an 
ordinary  grand  jury. 

In  the  past,  peers  have  sometimes  been  tried  by  a 
special  jury  consisting  of  not  less  than  twenty-three 
lords;  but  since  1685,  all  trials  have  been  before  the 
whole  House  of  Lords.  In  either  case  a  majority  is 
sufficient  to  convict  or  acquit. J  In  civil  suits,  the  fact 
that  one  or  both  parties  may  belong  to  the  peerage 
makes  no  difference,  and  the  case  is  tried  in  .the 
ordinary  courts.  If,  however,  the  claim  of  a  person 
to  a  peerage  is  at  stake,  the  claim  to  the  title  is 
decided  by  the  House  of  Lords. 

1  Britannica,  nth  ed.,  xvii.,  4;  Macaulay's  England,  "  Delamere  " 
in  Index;  Vernon-Harcourt,  His  Grace  the  Steward  and  the  Trial  of 
Peers,  417,  434;  Burke,  Trials  of  the  Aristocracy,  158,  357;  State 
Trials,  xix.,  1235;  Blackstone  (Jones's  ed.,  1916),  2584. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  LORDS  AS  A  LAW-MAKING  BODY 

Irrational  Basis  of  Membership.  No  progressive 
nation  would  today  create  a  law-making  body  like 
the  House  of  Lords.  Its  existence  is  based  on  historic 
precedent  and  habit,  not  on  reason.  What  could  be 
less  reasonable  than  to  suppose  that  a  man  is  suited 
to  make  laws  for  a  great  empire  simply  because  he 
inherits  a  title,  earned,  perhaps,  by  an  ancestor  for 
distinction  in  some  line  of  activity  in  no  way  con- 
nected with  the  science  and  art  of  government? 
Many  of  the  lords  in  fact  care  nothing  for  politics 
and  never  appear  in  Parliament  except  when  some 
interest  of  their  class  needs  their  votes. 

Elements  of  Strength  and  Usefulness.  And  yet 
the  House  of  Lords,  though  violating  both  common 
sense  and  the  principles  of  democratic  self-govern- 
ment, works  a  great  deal  better  than  might  be  ex- 
pected, as,  in  fact,  do  many  features  of  the  British 
constitution  which,  on  their  face,  appear  quite 
dangerous  or  absurd.  To  begin  with,  the  actual  work 

89 


90  The  Legislature 

of  the  peers  is  conducted  by  a  small  group  who  really 
take  a  deep  interest  in  public  life  and  give  it  a  life- 
long study  and  practice.  Some  of  these  are  simply 
earnest  men  of  ordinary  capacity,  but  some  are 
trained  minds  of  great  ability.  The  bishops,  too, 
though  appointed  because  of  eminence  in  the  church, 
and  not  primarily  as  legislators,  are  men  of  high 
character  and  much  above  the  average  in  intellect; 
and  though  they  are  not  constant  attendants  except 
when  religious,  moral,  or  educational  matters  are 
under  discussion,  they  frequently  make  formidable 
debaters. 

Why  the  Lords  have  Lost  their  Power.  The 
steady  decline  of  the  House  of  Lords  in  power  has 
not  been  due  primarily  to  their  hereditary  tenure's 
being  contrary  to  the  democratic  character  of  the 
times,  but  to  their  overwhelming  majority's  having 
been  steadily  for  generations  members  of  the  Con- 
servative, or  Tory,  party.  Over  four  fifths  of  the 
hereditary  peers  are  Conservatives,  as  are  practically 
all  the  bishops,  and  all  the  Scotch  and  Irish  repre- 
sentative peers,  since  the  great  majority  of  their 
fellows  who  elect  them  are  of  that  party  and  allow 
no  representation  to  the  Liberal  minority  in  their 
own  ranks.  Liberals  (or  Whigs,  as  they  are  still 
sometimes  called),  when  created  peers,  themselves 
drift  into  the  Conservative  camp,  or  at  the  least  their 
descendants  soon  do.  Thus  for  generations  one  party 


The  Lords  as  a  Law-Making  Body     91 

in  the  state  was  always  in  control  of  one  house  of  the 
legislature  and  could  defy,  up  to  the  danger  point 
of  inviting  revolution,  the  will  of  the  people  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  representative  branch  of  Parliament. 
The  Lords  regularly  used  their  power  as  Conservative 
partisans,  and  so  killed  many  of  the  measures  passed 
by  the  Liberal  House  of  Commons.  If  they  had 
voted  impartially  on  all  questions,  independently 
of  favouritism  towards  any  party,  they  would  have 
proved  a  valuable  check  upon  temporary  passion 
and  would  have  been  regarded  as  of  such  utility  that 
the  people  would  have  left  them  undisturbed,  or 
might  even  have  come  to  regard  them  with  a  venera- 
tion similar  to  that  entertained  in  this  country  for 
that  almost  equally  undemocratic,  but  by  no  means 
equally  partisan,  body,  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court.  But  no  vigorous  modern  democracy  would 
permanently  endure  an  hereditary  house  steadily  in 
the  possession  and  service  of  one  party,  and  that  the 
party  opposed  to  democratic  progress.  Hence  it  had 
been  apparent  for  years  that  some  reform  must  soon 
come. 

Clash  of  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  1909-11. 
The  occasion  for  the  reform  arose  when  the  Lords,  in 
1909,  in  violation  of  one  of  the  most  sacred  customs 
of  the  constitution,  killed  the  tax  bill,  because  it 
increased  the  taxes  on  their  land  in  a  way  to  lead 
them  to  think  that  large  estates  held  generation 


92  The  Legislature 

after  generation  in  the  same  families  would  ultimately 
be  subjected  to  such  burdens  as  to  render  the  system 
of  land  monopoly  in  a  few  hundred  families  unprofit- 
able. In  other  words,  the  social  and  economic 
constitution  appeared  to  them  to  be  threatened  with 
a  revolution  whose  object  was  the  extinction  of  the 
landed  aristocracy.  The  Lords  consider  that  such  a 
landed  aristocracy,  with  the  freedom  which  comes 
from  assured  hereditary  wealth,  is  of  great  value  in 
supplying  public-spirited  men  of  leisure,  friends  of 
learning  and  art,  who  may  set  dignified  standards  of 
customs  and  manners,  give  society  a  certain  stability 
and  grandeur  of  style,  and  impress  the  masses  with 
respect  for  property  and  government.  It  is  always  a 
question,  however,  whether  such  means  of  accom- 
plishing these  ends  do  not  rather  create  a  hatred  for 
property  and  government,  and  thus,  while  affording 
a  temporary  sense  of  security,  in  reality  render  them 
insecure.  At  all  events,  the  Liberals  were  convinced 
that,  whatever  the  value  of  these  considerations,  they 
had  been  carried  entirely  too  far  and  were  being 
maintained  at  too  great  an  exemption  of  the  rich 
and  too  heavy  a  cost  to  the  nation  at  large.  Accord- 
ingly, when  the  Lords  vetoed  the  tax  bill,  the  Prime 
Minister  dissolved  Parliament  and  appealed  to  the 
people.  The  election  returned  a  strong  majority  in 
favour  of  the  Liberals,  and  the  Lords  felt  compelled 
to  yield. 


The  Lords  as  a  Law-Making  Body      93 

Overcoming  Permanently  the  Lords'  Power  of 
Obstruction.  Several  other  important  bills  of  the 
Commons  had  been  killed  at  the  same  time  as  the 
tax  bill,  and  it  was  therefore  determined  to  use 
the  occasion,  the  people  being  thoroughly  aroused,  to 
break  forever  the  power  of  the  Lords  to  defeat  the 
popular  will.  The  Lords  themselves  admitted  that 
their  house  should  be  reformed  and  their  power 
reduced;  but  no  agreement  as  to  details  could  be 
reached  with  the  leaders  of  the  Commons,  and  the 
Lords  accordingly  found  themselves  confronted  with 
the  demand  that  they  accept  the  more  radical  reform 
proposed  by  the  Commons  alone.  On  their  refusal,  a 
dissolution  and  appeal  to  the  country  again  sustained 
the  Ministry.  The  "  die-in-the-last-ditchers  "  among 
the  peers  still  refusing  to  yield,  the  only  alternatives 
remaining  were  the  submission  of  the  people,  revolu- 
tion, violent  or  peaceable  as  the  event  should  deter- 
mine, or  swamping  the  Lords  with  new  appointees 
in  agreement  with  the  desire  of  the  nation.  The 
first  was  unthinkable,  the  second  unnecessary,  and 
the  crisis  was  relieved  by  the  threat  of  the  third. 
The  Ministry  simply  announced  that  His  Majesty 
considered  it  his  constitutional  duty  to  take  such 
steps  as  might  be  necessary  to  secure  the  passage  of 
the  bill.  This  courteous  expression  was  perfectly 
understood  as  meaning  that  the  King  would  appoint 
a  sufficient  number  of  Liberal  peers  to  overcome  the 


94  The  Legislature 

Conservative  majority.  It  would  be  senseless  to 
have  their  titles  cheapened  and  their  permanent 
control  of  their  house  annihilated  by  incurring  this 
inundation  of  new  nobles;  and  so  the  opposition 
absented  itself  and  the  "Parliament  Act  of  1911" 
was  passed  through  the  upper  house  by  its  few  titled 

supporters. 

-> 

The  terms  of  this  law  have  already  been  given  on 
page  24,  which  should  be  reread  at  this  point.  Its 
effect  is  simply  to  reduce  the  House  of  Lords  to  "a 
cautious  house  of  revision,"  which  cannot  partici- 
pate in  the  raising  or  spending  of  public  revenue, 
and  which  can  only  compel  the  Commons  to  wait 
two  years  for  mature  consideration  before  finally 
enacting  a  measure  on  which  the  people  have  set 
their  minds. 

The  Lords  Still  a  Useful  Part  of  the  Government. 
It  would  be  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  this  act 
destroys  the  power  of  the  House  of  Lords;  it  only 
limits  their  power.  Aside  from  the  fact  that  their 
veto  of  private  bills  is  still  absolute,  their  veto  may 
also  defeat  any  except  those  great  party  measures 
which  the  majority  of  the  nation  are  thoroughly 
determined  to  pass.  It  may  be  confidently  expected 
that  they  will  prove  more  useful  in  their  new  ca- 
pacity of  "a  cautious  house  of  revision"  than  in 
their  former  one  of  reactionary,  obstructionists. 

The  Ministry  and  the  Lords.    We  may  explain 


The  Lords  as  a  Law-Making  Body     95 

here  the  relations  of  the  Ministry  to  the  Lords. 
Many  of  the  Ministers  in  fact  belong  to  that  house, 
proving  that  there  is  no  objection  whatever  to  a  lord 
as  such  in  the  government,  but  that  the  only  objec- 
tion is  to  his  being  a  master  instead  of  a  servant  of 
the  people.  It  is  in  fact  customary  to  have  several 
of  the  more  important  executive  departments  repre- 
sented in  one  house  by  the  head  of  the  department 
and  in  the  other  by  his  first  assistant,  or  Parliamen- 
tary Under-Secretary,  in  order  that  there  may  be  a 
responsible  representative  of  the  government  to 
defend  its  policy  in  either  place.  Though  the  Prime 
Minister  is  himself  often  a  peer,  it  is  becoming  more 
and  more  a  disadvantage  for  him  to  be  removed  from 
the  Commons  as  the  arena  where  the  decisive  battles 
of  policies  are  fought;  and  hence  we  may  expect  to 
see  the  head  of  the  government  in  future  less  and 
less  frequently  chosen  from  the  Lords. 

An  adverse  vote  in  the  Lords  may  even  now  prove 
a  serious  inconvenience;  and  before  the  Parliament 
Act  of  1911  it  often  necessitated  the  abandonment  of 
some  of  the  Ministry's  cherished  plans;  but  it  has 
no  effect  in  depriving  the  Ministers  of  office  or  forcing 
a  dissolution. 

Procedure  in  the  House  of  Lords.  The  rules  for 
transacting  business  in  the  House  of  Lords  are  in 
general  similar  to  those  in  the  Commons,  but,  due 
to  the  greater  leisure  of  the  upper  house,  they  are 


96  The  Legislature 

simpler.  The  Lord  Chancellor  presides,  but  he  has 
no  such  power  as  the  Speaker  of  the  Commons.  The 
Lords  decide  all  points  of  order,  even  as  to  which 
of  two  members  rising  at  once  shall  have  the  right  to 
speak. 

Three  constitute  a  quorum,  and  on  one  occasion 
the  presiding  officer,  after  being  bored  for  an  hour, 
put  a  stop  to  the  orator  on  the  ground  of  no  quorum, 
as  they  were  the  only  two  members  present.  It  often 
happens  that  a  session  cannot  be  held  for  the  lack  of 
the  necessary  three;  and  frequently  when  a  quorum 
is  present  there  is  no  business  to  occupy  them.  The 
rules,  however,  do  not  allow  a  bill  to  be  passed  with- 
out the  presence  of  at  least  thirty  members,  though 
other  business  may  be  transacted  with  a  smaller 
number. 

The  Lord  Chancellor  the  Presiding  Officer.  One 
of  the  numerous  duties  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  is  to 
preside  over  the  House  of  Lords.  It  is  not  necessary 
that  he  should  be  a  peer,  and  in  fact  the  "wool  sack/' 
as  the  seat  which  he  occupies  is  called,  is  technically 
outside  the  bounds  of  the  house,  though  it  is  of 
course  as  really  in  the  chamber  as  any  other  of  its 
furnishings.  Though  a  commoner  might  exercise  all 
the  duties  of  the  Lord  Chancellor,  he  is  in  practice 
always  created  a  peer  if  not  one  already.  If  a  peer, 
he  votes  as  any  other  member  of  the  house.  Whether 
peer  or  commoner,  he  does  not  have  the  deciding 


The  Lords  as  a  Law-Making  Body     97 

vote.  In  case  of  a  tie  in  the  House  of  Lords,  the 
affirmative  simply  loses,  as  it  fails  to  secure  a  ma- 
jority. 

Principally  a  Chamber  of  Revision.  Even  before 
the  reduction  of  their  power  in  1911,  the  Lords  had 
been  tending  for  many  years  towards  becoming  a 
mere  chamber  of  revision  who  pass,  amend,  or  veto 
measures  sent  up  from  the  Commons,  but  who  intro- 
duce very  few  measures  of  their  own.  They  possess 
for  this  reason  the  great  advantage  of  not  being 
hurried.  Also,  as  their  votes  have  no  effect  in  sus- 
taining or  turning  out  the  Ministry,  they  are  more 
free  to  vote  according  to  their  individual  opinions 
without  having  their  freedom  shackled  by  the  obliga- 
tions of  party  loyalty.1  Hence  they  often  perform 
good  service  in  correcting  faults  or  oversights  in 
legislation ;  and  their  careful  threshing  out  of  private 
bills  is  of  great  public  value. 

We  may  well  believe  that  in  being  deprived  of 
their  excessive  powers,  the  Lords  have  secured  a 
longer  and  securer  hold  on  those  which  they  retain, 
and  also  a  firmer  place  in  the  respect  of  the  nation. 

1  A  little  consideration  will  show  that  this  is  not  inconsistent  with 
what  was  said  on  page  90  as  to  their  steady  support  of  the  Conserva- 
tives. 


PART  II. 

THE  EXECUTIVE 
CHAPTER  X 

THE   KING1 

The  King  as  He  Is.  Writers  on  the  English 
government  frequently  amaze  the  reader  with  a 
long  list  of  things  that  the  King  can  do,  and  then 
proceed  to  say  that  he  cannot  do  any  of  them  at  all. 
I  shall  not  do  this,  but  shall  attempt  rather  to  de- 
scribe the  King,  first  and  last,  as  he  really  is. 

The  Law  of  Succession.  The  law  of  succession  to 
the  Crown  is  passed  by  Parliament,  just  as  any  other 
statute.  Parliament  could  at  any  time  abolish  the 
kingship  itself  and  establish  a  republic  or  any  other 
form  of  government.  The  King  would  be  compelled 
by  the  custom  of  the  constitution  to  sign  his  own 
deposition,  and  the  new  regime  would  continue  so 

1  All  that  is  said  regarding  the  powers  of  the  King  applies,  of 
course,  to  the  Queen  when  the  sovereign  is  a  woman. 

For  the  full  legal  title  of  the  King,  see  page  309  and  footnote. 

98 


The  King 


99 


long  as  the  people  chose  to  elect  a  House  of  Commons 
which  approved  of  it.  Parliament  has  frequently 
changed  the  succession  to  the  Crown,  and  though  it 
has  always  confined  itself  to  shifting  it  from  one 
branch  of  the  royal  family  to  another,  it  is  just  as 
free  to  go  to  an  entirely  new  stock. 
*  The  law  decrees  that  the  Crown  shall  descend 
through  the  eldest  line  of  the  royal  family,  sons 
having  precedence  over  daughters,  even  though  the 
daughters  be  older.  The  descent  is  through  the 
direct  line  from  parent  to  child,  whether  male  or 
female,  in  preference  to  the  collateral  line  of  brothers 
of  the  sovereign,  even  though  the  latter  should 
represent  an  unbroken  line  of  males.  Thus  a 
daughter,  or  any  descendant  of  a  daughter,  of  a 
dead  man  who  would  have  inherited  the  Crown  had 
he  been  alive  when  the  last  sovereign  died,  takes  pre- 
cedence over  living  brothers  of  that  King.  Accord- 
ingly when  William  IV  died  without  descendants,  his 
niece  Victoria  became  Queen,  even  though  William 
left  a  brother;  because  her  father,  though  dead,  was 
older  than  the  King's  surviving  brother. 

If  the  heir  or  the  reigning  sovereign  becomes  a 
Catholic  or  marries  a  Catholic,  he  thereby  becomes, 
so  far  as  the  succession  to  the  Crown  is  concerned, 
legally  dead,  and  the  throne  passes  to  the  next  heir 
who  is  a  Protestant.  This  law  had  its  origin  in  the 
religious  struggles  of  the  seventeenth  century  and  is 


ioo  The  Executive 

also  connected  with  the  fact  that  church  and  state 
are  united  under  one  head  in  England.  So  long  as 
the  sovereign  is  head  of  the  established  church  and 
must  swear  as  part  of  his  coronation  oath,  along 
with  the  pledge  to  observe  and  uphold  all  the  laws, 
that  he  will  maintain  and  defend  the  Protestant 
religion  as  by  law  established,  it  would  be  almost 
impossible  to  do  away  with  this  rule. 

Though  we  speak  of  the  King  and  Queen,  only 
one  of  them  is  the  sovereign,  and  the  wife  or  husband, 
as  the  case  may  be,  has  no  more  legal  authority  than 
any  other  subject.1 

"The  King  never  Dies."  Though.  Parliament 
fixes  by  law  the  order  of  succession,  no  action  is 
necessary  in  the  case  of  each  new  sovereign,  and  in 
fact  in  legal  theory  "the  King  never  dies."  What  is 
meant  is  that  the  kingly  office  is  never  vacant;  and 
accordingly,  on  the  death  of  the  sovereign,  an  official 
steps  out  before  the  people  and  proclaims:  "The 
King  is  dead;  long  live  the  King!" 

The  Long  Struggle  between  King  and  People. 
Magna  Charta.  There  was  for  centuries  a  struggle 
between  King  and  people  as  to  which  should  rule. 
The  story  of  this  contest,  its  variations  and  combina- 

1  Only  in  the  case  of  William  and  Mary  have  both  King  and  Queen 
been  sovereign ;  and  even  in  that  case  it  was  ordained  that  the  govern- 
ing authority  should  rest  with  William  alone.  The  proper  title  of  the 
husband  or  wife  of  the  real  sovereign  is  Prince  Consort  or  Queen 
Consort. 


The  King  icf 

tions,  failures  and  successes,  forms  a  large  part  of 
English  history — the  part  that  gives  that  history  its 
most  distinctive  characteristics  and  contributes 
principally  to  its  value  to  the  rest  of  the  world. 
In  1215,  the  barons,  with  armour  on  and  swords  in 
their  hands,  and  backed  up  by  the  people,  forced 
King  John  to  sign  Magna  Charta,  and  as  a  part  of 
that  law  compelled  him  to  agree  that  if  he  should 
violate  their  liberties  as  therein  defined,  a  com- 
mittee of  twenty-five  barons  appointed  to  watch 
him  should  summon  the  others  to  make  war  upon 
him.  Very  soon  this  was  necessary,  and  though 
they  won  a  sort  of  victory,  men  saw  that  civil  war 
was  a  high  price  to  pay,  and  moreover  that  it  was 
a  very  ineffective  remedy. 

Origin  of  the  House  of  Commons.  On  the  next 
great  occasion  of  resistance  to  royal  tyranny,  they 
sought  a  more  peaceful  means  in  the  Provisions  of 
Oxford  of  1258,  and  under  the  le.adership  of  Earl 
Simon  de  Montfort,  again  backed  up  by  the  common 
people,  the  nobles  forced  a  committee  of  fifteen  upon 
the  King  as  his  rulers  and  guardians.  This  likewise 
soon  led  to  civil  war.  But  Earl  Simon's  efforts  had 
not  been  in  vain;  for  thirty  years  later  the  most 
valuable  and  characteristic  feature  of  his  program, 
the  association  of  representatives  of  the  common 
people  in  the  work  of  government,  which  he  had 
inaugurated  in  1265,  was  made  a  permanent  part  of 


1 02  The  Executive 

the  constitution;  and  from  that  day  to  this  no  Parlia- 
ment has  ever  met  without  the  elected  representatives 
of  the  English  nation. 

Impeachment.  But  even  with  the  nobles  grown 
stronger  and  the  people  represented  in  the  House  of 
Commons  after  1295,'  the  royal  despotism  was  still 
heavy.  Having  twice  found  by  sad  experience  that 
to  lay  hands  upon  the  King's  person  shocked  the 
sense  of  loyalty  and  hence  led  to  civil  war  and  failure, 
Parliament  in  1376  adopted  the  method  of  striking 
at  the  men  who  carried  out  the  King's  despotic 
schemes.  This  consisted  of  a  trial  by  Parliament  of 
an  official  considered  dangerous  to  the  public  wel- 
fare, and  was  called  an  impeachment.  The  "high 
crimes'and  misdemeanours  "  for  which  it  was  sought 
to  bring  the  offender  to  account  were  usually  con- 
nected with  the  discharge  of  his  public  duties  and 
were  committed  while  he  held  the  office  from  which 
it  was  sought  to  remove  him;  but  Parliament  was 
not  obliged  to  observe  these  limitations. 

The  impeachment  began  with  a  mere  majority 
vote  in  the  Commons  to  prefer  charges  against  the 
obnoxious  official,  after  which  they  elected  several 


1  At  first  the  nobles  and  commons  deliberated  together,  though 
they  voted  as  separate  orders,  each  granting  the  King  such  a  pro- 
portion of  their  goods  as  they  saw  fit.  As  the  granting  of  supplies 
was  in  those  days  the  principal  business  ot  Parliament,  this  arrange- 
ment worked  fairly  well.  The  Commons  did  not  begin  to  meet  as  a 
separate  house  until  about  1350. 


The  King  103 

of  their  members  to  conduct  the  prosecution  of  the 
accused  before  the  House  of  Lords.  The  trial  was 
carried  on  in  much  the  same  fashion  as  in  the  ordi- 
nary courts,  the  Commons  seeking  to  support  their 
charges  by  evidence  and  argument,  while  the  accused 
personally  or  through  his  lawyers  conducted  his 
defence,  The  Lords  acted  as  judges  and  by  a  mere 
majority  vote  declared  him  innocent  or  guilty.  If 
found  guilty,  he  was  removed  from  office,  and  might 
in  addition  be  reduced  to  poverty  by  a  tremendous 
fine,  be  banished  or  imprisoned,  or  even  put  to  death. x 
Removal  of  Ministers  at  the  Mere  Wish  of 
Parliament.  A  royal  official  could  assist  his  master 
to  do  many  tyrannical  acts  before  provoking  his 

1  The  method  is  thus  seen  to  be  similar  to  that  in  the  United 
States,  which  was  copied  from  the  English  example,  except  that  in  the 
United  States  a  two  thirds  vote  of  the  upper  house  is  required  for 
conviction  and  the  punishment  is  limited.  In  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States,  punishment  on  impeachment  cannot  extend  further 
than  removal  from  office  and  incapacity  ever  to  hold  office  again 
under  the  federal  government.  In  many  of  the  States,  punishment 
cannot  extend  beyond  removal  from  the  office  then  held.  This  is 
partly  due  to  the  democratic  spirit  of  the  times,  which  considers  that 
the  people  should  have  the  right  to  endorse  the  action  of  their  repre- 
sentatives by  refusing  the  official  a  re-election,  or  vindicate  him  by 
returning  him  to  office;  partly  to  American  good  nature,  which 
believes  in  giving  a  man  another  chance;  and  partly  to  the  feeling 
that  no  individual  can  be  a  really  serious  menace  to  the  public  safety. 

In  any  case,  the  accused  may  be  prosecuted  in  the  courts  and 
punished  like  any  other  criminal,  irrespective  of  whether  acquitted 
or  convicted  in  the  impeachment  trial;  for  the  impeachment,  in  this 
country  at  least,  does  not  put  him  in  peril  of  life  or  member,  but  is 
simply  to  remove  him  from  a  position  in  which  he  is  injurious  to  the 
State. 


104  The  Executive 

removal  by  impeachment;  and  consequently  Parlia- 
ment made  efforts,  generally  unsuccessful,  from  time 
to  time  for  the  next  three  hundred  years,  to  secure 
the  right  of  selecting  the  Ministers  of  the  King.  It 
is  expressive  of  the  political  talent  of  the  English 
race  that  as  early  as  the  first  quarter  of  the  fifteenth 
century  they  had  hit  upon  this  and  seemed  in  a  fair 
way  towards  its  accomplishment.  But  events,  upon 
whose  history  we  cannot  enter,  checked  the  devel- 
opment, and  so  the  work  had  almost  all  to  be 
done  over  again  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteeSth 
centuries. 

Cabinet  Government  and  the  Supremacy  of  the 
Commons.     Since  the  expulsion  of  James  II  in  1688, 
fhg  iflngfoip  fry  been  mereTy  an  omceTTLSeTEe  post^. 
mastership,  and  the  King  simply  the  first  ..official 
x  under  the  law.     The  development  of  cabinet  govern- 

ment which  soon  followed  made  royal  despotism 
impossible.  The  continued  growth  of  the  power  of 
the  people  and  the  decrease  of  that  of  the  nobles 
recently  culminated  in  the  Parliament  Act  of  1911, 
by  which  the  House  of  Commons  is  made  supreme.  r 

The  Prime  Minister  the  Real  Chief  Executive. 
Let  us  remember,  therefore,  that  the^King[  is_the_, 
executive  only  in  name,  and  that  the  Prime  Minister 
as  head  of  the  Cabinet  is  the  real  chief  executive. 
The  authority  which  the_lCrown   could  in  former 

1  See  page  24. 


\  k 


The  King  105 

centuries  exercise  was  very  great,  and  theoretically 
most  of  those  powers  still  belong  to  the  Crown,  for 
they  have  never  been  taken  away  by  any  law.  But  as 
a  matter  of  fact  they  have  all  settled  by  custom  as 
strong  as  law  into  the  hands  of  the  Prime  Minister, 
Cabinet,  or  other  responsible  officials.  "The  King 
reigns,  but  does  not  govern. " 

Prerogative.  The  immense  powers  nominally 
residing  in  the  Crown  are  of  two  kinds:  first,  the 
prerogative;  and  second,  the  powers  conferred  by 
act  of  Parliament.  The  word  prerogative  conveys 
the  idea  of  absolute  and  undeniable  right  the  exercise 
of  which  is  not  derived  from  any  superior,  and  can  be 
questioned  or  checked  by  no  one.  The  royal  pre- 
rogative consists  at  any  particular  time  of  all  the 
powers,  rights,  and  privileges,  not  taken  away  by 
Parliament,  which  the  sovereign  was  accustomed  to 
exercise  in  the  days  of  the  mighty  monarchs  of 
mediaeval  England.  The  prerogative  is  still  very 
extensive,  though  it  is  now,  of  course,  exercised  by 
the  courts  of  justice,  the  Prime  Minister,  or  some 
other  responsible  branch  of  the  government. 

Statutory  Powers  of  the  Crown.  Aside  from  its 
prerogative  rights,  the  Crown  enjoys  other  powers 
needful  for  the  public  service  that  Parliament  has 
from  time  to  time  conferred.  &XL  these  executive 
powers,  both  prerogative  and  statutory,  are  useful 
and  needful  for  conducting  the  government.  There 


io6  The  Executive 

has,  therefore,  been  no  occasion  for  modern  de- 
mocracy to  destroy  them;  it  has  simply  captured 
them  and  entrusted  them  to  men  of  its  own  choice 
for  its  own  interests  and  service. 

Consent  of  Ministers  Necessary  for  All  Acts  of  the 
King.  The  King  cannot  exercise  even  the  slightest 
of  his  royal  powers  without  the  consent  of  his  Minis- 
ters; for  it  has  been  for  generations  firmly  established 
that  no  governmental  act  of  the  sovereign  can  be 
carried  out  without  the  order's  being  signed  by  some 
Minister  responsible  to  Parliament  and  the  courts  of 
law  for  his  act.  The  King  is  of  course  free  to  follow 
his  own  inclinations  in  his  purely  personal  conduct, 
such  as  deciding  whether  he  will  attend  the  opera  or 
the  drama  or  choosing  a  place  where  he  will  spend 
the  summer,  provided  even  this  is  not  such  as  to 
have  a  political  significance,  as,  e.g.,  going  to  a 
foreign  country;  but  he  has  no  more  power  to  do  a 
governmental  act  than  the  private  secretary  of  the 
President  of  the  United  States.  In  fact  the  King 
cannot  choose  his  own  private  secretary,  lest  he 
should  select  a  man  who  might  seek  to  interfere  with 
the  supremacy  of  the  Ministers.  He  cannot  even 
name  as  Lords  of  the  Bedchamber  (certain  courtiers 
closely  associated  with  him  personally)  noblemen 
not  acceptable  to  the  Cabinet. 

"The  King  can  do  no  Wrong."  Hence  it  is  that 
English  law  has  the  maxim,  "The  King  can  do  no 


The  King  107 

wrong."  Instead  of  being,  as  is  sometimes  igno- 
rantly  misunderstood,  a  statement  of  irresponsible 
personal  despotism,  it  indicates  the  impossibility  of 
such.  Neither  can  he  do  any  right — as  sovereign. 
This  was  the  sense  of  Charles  II 's  witty  retort  upon 
an  equally  witty  courtier  who  wrote  upon  the  door 
of  the  royal  bedchamber: 

Here  lies  our  sovereign  lord  the  King, ' 

Whose  word  no  man  relies  on; 
He  never  says  a  foolish  thing 

Nor  never  does  a  wise  one. 

"'Tis  true,"  replied  the  King,  "because  while  my 
words  are  my  own,  my  acts  are  my  Ministers'." 
Therefore,  if  tyranny  should  be  attempted,  the 
responsible  Minister  or  Ministry  would  be  turned 
out  of  office  by  Parliament;  and  if  the  criminal  law 
had  been  violated,  the  guilty  official  would  be 
promptly  punished  by  the  law  courts,  j^hile  the 
majestic  figure  of  the  sovereign,  typifying  the 
nationality,  patriotism,  loyalty,  and  imperial  unity 
of  all  who  own  the  British  flag  around  the  seven  seas, 
would  still  rise  calmly  above  the  din  of  party  strife 
and  personal  wrong-doing,  instead  of  being  dragged 
into  the  conflict,  with  resulting  disorganization  of 
government  and  possibly  civil  war. 

How  the  King  Appoints  his  Ministers  has  already 
been  described  in  Chapter  IV,  where  it  was  ex- . 


io8  The  Executive 

plained  that  he  does  not  act  upon  his  own  preference, 
but  must  bestow  the  positions  upon  the  leaders  of 
the  party  having  a  majority  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. As  we  all  will  recall,  he  must  name  as  his 
Prime  Minister  the  recognized  leader  of  this  party, 
while  that  man  really  appoints  the  other  Ministers. 
Disappearance  of  the  Royal  Veto.  We  may  now 
examine  the  principal  royal  prerogatives.  The  King 
was  in  remote  times  practically  the  chief  part  of  the 
legislature,  merely  asking  the  nobles  to  confirm 
what  they  could  not  well  refuse;  later  he  legislated 
really  by  the  advice  and  consent  of  Parliament;  still 
later  he  formed  in  fact  a  third  house,  in  that  no  act 
of  Parliament  could  become  law  without  his  consent ; 
and  though  the  royal  signature  is  still  legally  neces- 
sary, it  has  never  been  refused  to  any  bill  passed  by 
the  two  houses  since  1707;  and  hence  the  so-called 
royal  "veto"  is  as  much  a  thing  of  the  past  as  the 
feudal  system  or  the  Crusades.  *  To  speak  of  this  as 
part  of  the  royal  prerogative  is  mere  fiction  or  word 
juggling.  As  well  lecture  on  the  comparative  effi- 
ciency of  long  bows  and  cross  bows  in  modern  war- 
fare. Custom  even  forbids  the  King  to  enter  either 
House  of  Parliament  except  on  certain  formal 
occasions,  because  long  ago  he  used  to  appear  in 

1  Though  the  royal  disapproval  was  final  and  could  not  be  over- 
ridden, it  was  not  strictly  a  "  veto  " ;  for  the  King  simply  withheld  his 
signature,  and  did  not  kill  the  bill  with  a  veto  message,  as  does  our 
President. 


The  King  109 

order  to  intimidate  the  members;  nor  may  any 
member  allude  in  the  debate  to  the  opinions  or 
desires  of  the  sovereign. 

Appointments  and  Honours.  The  royal  preroga- 
tive of  the  appointing  power  is  exercised  solely  by 
the  responsible  Ministers  or  by  such  inferior  officials 
as  have  been  given  the  power  to  fill  minor  places. 
By  a  quaint  expression,  the  Crown  is  described  as 
''the  fountain  of  honour ";  i.e.  it  confers  all  titles 
such  as  peerages  and  baronetcies,1  and  awards 
medals  or  badges,  and  membership  in  certain  dis- 
tinguished orders  of  merit.  But  appointment  to  all 
these  honours  is  in  the  hands  of  the  Prime  Minister, 
though  the  King  may  personally  confer  the  title  upon 
the  fortunate  recipient. 

Commander-in-Chief  of  the  Army  and  Navy.  By 
another  ancient  prerogative,  the  King  is  the  com- 
mander-in-chief  of  the  army  and  navy,  as  is  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  whose  powers  in  this, 
as  in  many  other  respects,  were  copied  from  the 
ancient  powers  of  the  English  Crown ;  but  the  duties 
are  performed  by  those  Ministers  in  charge  of  these 


1  A  baronet  is  a  member  of  the  knighthood,  but  not  of  the  nobility, 
and  is  called  Sir,  as  Sir  Walter  Scott.  His  wife,  like  the  wife  of  a 
nobleman,  has  the  right  to  the  title  Lady  instead  of  plain  Mrs.  The 
ladies  of  the  higher  ranks  of  the  nobility,  however,  are  usually  re- 
ferred to,  as  are  the  higher  ranks  of  peers,  by  their  distinctive  titles, 
as  Duchess,  Marchioness  (the  wife  of  a  Marquis),  or  Countess  (the 
wife  of  an  Earl). 


no  The  Executive 

departments,  subject  to  the  supervision  of  the 
Prime  Minister,  while  not  a  boat  nor  a  soldier  would 
move  at  the  personal  order  of  the  King. 

"  The  Fountain  of  Justice."  In  memory  of  the 
time  when  mediaeval  kings  actually  heard  the  pleas 
of  their  subjects  or  sent  out  judges  to  right  their 
wrongs,  the  Crown  is  called  "the  fountain  of  jus- 
tice." •  Legal  papers  still  run  in  the  name  of  the 
sovereign  and  certain  offenders  are  still  tried  in  the 
King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice ; 
but  the  prerogative  has  disappeared  well-nigh  com- 
pletely here,  instead,  as  in  many  other  cases,  of 
having  been  merely  transferred  to  some  representa- 
tive of  the  King;  for  the  judicial  department,  though 
the  judges  are  selected  by  the  Prime  Minister  or  his 
fellow-minister  the  Lord  Chancellor,  is  virtually  as 
unmolested  by  executive  interference  as  is  the 
judiciary  of  the  United  States. 

Pardoning  Power.  The  pardoning  power  might 
be  considered  a  little  rill  of  the  prerogative  still 
flowing  down  beside  "the  fountain  of  justice." 
Applications  for  pardon  are  examined  by  the  Home 
Secretary  and  approved  or  disapproved  by  him. 
The  King  could  no  more  free  his  own  son  from  the 
clutches  of  the  law  without  the  consent  of  that  official 
than  could  the  humblest  coal  miner  swinging  his 
pick  in  the  dark  caverns  of  the  earth  as  he  mourns 
for  his  wayward  loved  one. 


The  King  in 

The  King  Personally  Exempt  from  Punishment  or 
Suit.  Since  "the  King  can  do  no  wrong,"  at  least 
in  legal  theory,  as  explained  above,1  if  he  were  to 
amuse  himself  some  morning  by  shooting  dead  each 
of  his  servants  as  they  arrive,  it  would  be  no  crime 
in  the  eyes  of  the  law.  If  Parliament  should  consider 
this  conduct  conclusive  evidence  of  confirmed  in- 
sanity, however,  they  would  have  him  confined  in  a 
proper  hospital  and  appoint  some  person,  preferably 
some  near  relative  of  the  sovereign,  to  perform  the 
duties  belonging  to  the  royal  office  under  some  such 
title  as  Regent.2 

The  King  is  sued  like  an  ordinary  person  in  civil 

1  See  pages  106-7. 

2  Apparently  the  President  of  the  United  States  could  not  be 
arrested  during  his  term  of  office  for  any  crime,  not  on  account  of 
any  theory  as  to  his  being  unable  to  commit  wrong,  however,  but 
from  the  necessity  of  having  some  person  as  the  executive  head  of  the 
government  whose  liberty  cannot  be  restrained  on  any  pretext. 
Certainly  the  President  could  not  be  arrested  while  in  office  for 
violating  the  law  of  any  State,  since  even  minor  United  States  officials 
are  protected  from  the  possibility  of  arbitrary  interference  with  the 
performance  of  their  duties,  and  therefore  with  the  activities  of  the 
federal  government,  by  arrest  at  the  hands  of  State  authorities  for 
crimes  alleged  to  have  been  committed  in  the  performance  of  their 
duties,  though  they  can  be  punished  for  such  crimes  by  the  consent  of 
the  federal  authorities,  or  after  their  removal  from  office. 

It  is  a  disputed  legal  question,  which  fortunately  no  court  has 
ever  been  called  upon  to  decide,  whether  the  Governor  of  an  Ameri- 
can State  could  be  immediately  arrested  and  tried  for  a  serious  crime 
committed  while  he  was  in  office  or  whether  his  arrest  and  trial  would  • 
have  to  be  postponed  until  he  was  no  longer  chief  executive.  Either 
President  or  Governor  after  leaving  office  is  triable  and  punishable, 
like  any  other  person,  for  any  crime  either  personal  or  official  com- 
mitted while  in  office. 


ii2  The  Executive 

matters,  though  his  permission  must  be  obtained, 
on  the  theory  that  the  sovereign  cannot  be  sued 
without  his  consent.  Permission  is  readily  given.1 

The  answer  to  the  objection  that  the  King's  legal 
immunity  is  unjust  and  absurd  is  that  practically  it 
is  neither,  but  on  the  contrary  is  a  necessary  part  of 
the  system  of  government  by  a  responsible  Ministry 
through  which  royal  injustice  and  absurdity  have 
been  made  impossible.  If  any  King  should  presume 
upon  his  personal  immunity,  he  would  soon  be 
taught  as  effectually  as  was  Charles  I,  though  doubt- 
less not  in  just  the  same  way,  that  the  liberties  of 
the  subject  cannot  be  violated  with  impunity. 

Foreign  Affairs.  Another  of  the  ancient  royal 
prerogatives  is  the  conducting  of  foreign  relations. 
This  is  a  duty  which  it  is  always  necessary  to  entrust 
with  large  freedom  of  action  to  the  executive.  In  the 
United  States  it  is  lodged  with  the  President,  but  is 
shared  by  the  Senate,  in  that  treaties  must  receive 
the  approval  of  that  body.  In  England,  however, 
the  Ministers  of  the  Crown  conduct  all  foreign  rela- 
tions, including  even  the  declaration  of  war,  the 

1  Presidents  and  Governors,  not  being  sovereign  in  any  sense,  but 
only  public  servants,  may  be  sued  in  the  civil  courts  at  any  time  for 
personal  debts  or  wrongs.  But  the  United  States  and  each  of  the 
several  States  is  free  from  suit  without  its  consent,  except  by  some 
other  sovereign.  The  States  sometimes  sue  each  other  in  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court  and  might  be  sued  there  by  foreign  states;  but 
in  practice,  claims  of  different  nations  against  each  other  are  adjusted 
through  diplomacy. 


The  King  113 

concluding  of  peace,  and  the  making  of  treaties, 
without  any  confirmation  by  Parliament  or  any 
consultation,  further  than  they  see  fit,  with  that 
body.  The  more  extensive  and  pressing  character 
of  diplomatic  problems  in  Europe  necessitates  the 
Foreign  Minister's  having  a  free  hand  and  consider- 
able power  for  prompt  and  decisive  action.  Although 
the  Minister  manages  these  affairs  in  harmony  with 
the  general  aims  and  principles  of  the  party,  Parlia- 
ment allows  a  larger  degree  of  freedom  there  than  in 
any  other  department. 

The  "Foreign  Secretary,"  as  he  is  commonly 
called,  acts  in  closer  and  more  constant  consultation 
with  the  Premier  than  does  any  other  Minister,  and 
the  momentous  issues  which  arise  in  his  department 
are  submitted  to  the  most  serious  consideration  of 
the  whole  Cabinet.  The  Premier  reads  every  impor- 
tant dispatch  and  exercises  a  firm  and  unremitting 
control  over  the  general  course  of  the  country's 
foreign  policy.  The  King  also  insists  more  strongly 
on  his  right  to  be  consulted  in  the  business  of  this 
department  than  in  any  other.  He  sees  all  the 
important  dispatches  and  although  he  can  only 
express  and  not  enforce  his  views,  his  advice  is  here 
sometimes  of  great  value.  Jliis jwas  particularly 
true  of  Kin^  Edward  VII. 

The  reason  for  the  closer  attention  by  the  King 
and  the  stricter  control  by  the  Prime  Minister  in 


H4  The  Executive 

foreign  affairs  than  in  other  departments  is  because 
of  the  immense  consequences  of  peace  or  war, 
national  benefit  or  national  calamity,  that  depend 
upon  the  conduct  of  relations  with  other  countries. 
We  must  understand,  of  course,  that,  though  the 
Foreign  Secretary  acts  under  these  necessary  limita- 
tions, the  fact  that  he  is  selected  because  of  his 
eminent  qualifications  of  information  and  judgment 
secures  for  his  opinions  and  leadership  great  con- 
sideration. 

[  Another  difference  between  this  office  and  all  others 
is  the  necessity  of  secrecy  in  diplomatic  affairs.  This 
often  makes  it  proper  for  the  Secretary  to  reply  to 
questions  in  Parliament  that  the  public  interest  for- 
bids his  furnishing  the  information  requested.  This, 
and  the  fact  that  at  least  one  of  the  five  Secretaries 
of  State  must  be  a  member  of  the  Lords,  leads  fre- 
quently to  his  being  chosen  from  that  house. 

War  and  Peace.  The  prerogative  even  includes 
the  right  of  declaring  war  and  making  peace,  as  well 
as  treaties  on  any  subject,  so  long  as  they  do  not 
involve  any  tax  upon  the  people  or  violate  the  law 
of  the  land.  The  power  of  the  Cabinet,  or  we  might 
even  say  of  the  Prime  Minister  as  the  depositary  of 
this  ancient  royal  prerogative,  to  plunge  the  country 
into  war  seems  inconsistent  with  the  supremacy  of 
Parliament.  The  inconsistency  is,  however,  mainly 
apparent;  for  the  Premier,  even  though  backed  up 


The  King  115 

unanimously  by  the  Cabinet,  would  not  take  such  a 
step  without  learning  the  sentiments  of  the  Commons 
and  of  the  country.  An  interesting  contrast  is 
offered  here  with  the  government  of  Germany,  where 
the  power  to  declare  war  is  lodged  in  the  Bundesrath, 
or  upper  house  of  the  imperial  Parliament,  which 
represents  the  sovereigns  of  the  twenty-five  states 
composing  the  Empire.  But  it  cannot  be  doubted 
that  the  destinies  of  peace  and  war  are  far  more 
removed  from  popular  influence  or  control  in  Ger- 
many than  in  England.  The  difference  is  in  the 
spirit  that  permeates  the  two  systems  and  the  extra- 
legal  customs  that  modify  the  effect  of  the  formal 
constitution,  thus  rendering  the  apparently  despotic 
power  of  the  Prime  Minister  far  more  democratic 
in  fact  than  the  formally  less  autocratic  method  of 
the  German  constitution. 

Many  authorities  are  of  the  opinion  that,  not- 
withstanding the  large  degree  of  moral  control 
exercised  by  Parliament,  the  power  of  the  Cabinet 
is  in  these  affairs  dangerously  extensive.  If  they 
should  err  in  the  fateful  decision  for  war,  neither  the 
Parliament  nor  the  country  would  have  any  effective 
remedy;  for,  although  they  could  force  the  resigna- 
tion of  the  offending  Ministry  and  the  appointment 
of  another  more  in  harmony  with  the  desires  of  the 
nation,  this  would  not  of  itself  bring  about  peace 
nor  heal  the  public  harm.  To  bring  more  quickly 


n6  The  Executive 

to  an  end  a  war  that  should  never  have  occurred 
would  be  the  extent  of  their  power. 

Statutory  Orders  and  Orders  in  Council.  A  great 
authority  which  has  been  conferred  upon  the  Crown, 
acting  of  course  through  the  proper  Minister,  is  the 
issuing  of  "statutory  orders"  which  have  the  force 
of  law.  They  are  of  course  subject  to  repeal  by 
Parliament.  The  orders  relate  generally  to  such 
subjects  as  education,  public  health,  etc.  Though 
conferred  by  Parliament  and  therefore  statutory, 
this  right  of  the  Crown  is  closely  akin  to  the  preroga- 
tive right  of  issuing  Orders  in  Council,  a  function 
which  in  time  of  war  assumes  immense  importance 
in  regulating  the  relations  with  neutral  countries  in 
regard  to  such  matters  as  commerce,  blockades, 
contraband  of  war,  etc. 

Head  of  the  Established  Church.  Derived  from 
act  of  Parliament,  and  not  a  part  of  the  prerogative, 
is  the  peculiar  function  of  the  English  sovereign, 
due  to  the  union  of  church  and  state,  of  acting  as 
head  of  the  established  church.  In  this  capacity  the 
King  is  supposed  by  law  to  appoint  the  bishops  and 
to  exercise  other  momentous  powers,  the  nature  of 
which  will  be  explained  in  Chapter  XXX.  Either  the 
sovereign,  or  the  Prime  Minister  who  actually  exer- 
cises the  power,  may  be  a  member  of  some  other 
denomination,1  or  for  that  matter  even  an  infidel, 

1  Though  the  King  cannot  be  a  Catholic.     See  page  99. 


The  King 


117 


as  both  have  at  times  in  the  past  been  men  of  disso- 
lute lives. 

The  King  not  a  Figurehead.  It  is  evident,  then, 
that  the  King,  though  in  theory  clothed  with  such 
majestic  power,  is  in  fact  entirely  without  authority. 

H  r>n  P  u^3_  jjaerftafigiitfifa^^   32isnsb  ^  h^  no  pawerT 

he  has    reat  influence.    He  is  in  constant  communi- 


cation with  the  Premier,  and  to  a  less  extent  with 
the  other  Ministers,  and  the  policy  of  the  Cabinet  in 
all  important  matters  is  announced  to  him.  He  is 
thus  in  a  OQrrQ  n  flfrmsmant  Miniffpr,  a  member  of 
every  Cabinet,  but  without  authority  and  without 
"responsibility." 

Though  the  King  must  be  kept  informed  of  govern- 
ment business,  he  is  not  consulted  in  the  discussion 
or  shaping  of  measures,  but  only  receives  the  report 
of  what  the  Cabinet  has  already  decided.  His 
opportunity  of  enforcing  his  views  is  thus  seriously 
hampered  by  the  fact  that  he  is  invited  simply  to 
comment  upon  an  already  matured  decision  in  the 
framing  of  which  he  has  had  no  part  and  which  the 
Ministers  will  not  readily  modify,  instead  of  being 
allowed  to  participate  in  the  discussion  while  opinions 
are  still  unsettled.  For  it  is  one  of  the  peculiarities 
of  the  English  Constitution  that  the  King  is  forbidden 
by  custom  to  attend  the  meeting  of  the  Cabinet,  who 
have  no  legal  existence  except  as  the  King's  own 


The  Executive 

Privy  Council. x  Still,  his  weight  of  influence  may  be 
considerable  on  many  occasions  in  matters  not 
concerned  with  important  party  policy.  We  have 
just  observed2  how  his  information  and  long  fa- 
miliarity with  foreign  relations  through  the  terms  of 
many  Ministries  may  be  of  great  value.  In  this 
branch  his  advice  makes  for  permanence  and  steadi- 
ness, the  two  great  essentials  in  foreign  relations,  and 
is,  even  a  man  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  views  thought,  on 
the  whole  of  benefit  to  the  country. 

The  real  position  of  the  King  under  the  English 
Constitution  is  well  stated  by  Bagehot  as  follows: 
he  has  "  three  rights — the  right  to  be  consulted,  the 
right  to  advise,  and  the  fight  to  warn.  And  a  king 
of  great  sense  and  sagacity  would  want  no  others." 
^Attachment  of  the  English  to  the  Limitecf 
Monarchy.  The  English  people  are  strongly  at- 
tached to  their  form  of  government  under  a  limited 
constitutional  monarchy  and  regard  the  King  with 
devoted  loyalty.  Even  in  our  republic,  we  may 
observe  how  strong  are  the  enthusiasm  and  affection 
aroused  in  the  people  by  the  personality  of  political 
leaders.  In  England,  or  for  that  matter  in  any 
monarchy  in  which  the  sovereign  has  for  generations 
conducted  himself  with  true  liberality,  intelligence, 
and  patriotism,  this  sense  of  personal  loyalty,  which 
is  one  of  the  finest  and  strongest  traits  of  human 

1  See  page  124  for  the  Privy  Council.         a  Pages  116  and  117. 


The  King  119 

nature,  is  aroused  to  the  highest  degree,  and  makes 
the  King  the  personified  embodiment  of  the  nation, 
its  aspirations,  its  interests,  and  its  ideals.  However 
fierce  may  be  party  strife  and  the  denunciation  of 
party  leaders,  these  men  are  not  the  government 
itself.  The  King  of  England  must  never  express  any 
views  or  commit  the  slightest  act  indicating  political 
bias,  nor  must  he  ever  be  referred  to  or  involved  in 
any  way  in  partisan  strife.  Standing  apart  from  all 
this,  he  serves  as  a  buffer  to  prevent  the  shock  of 
party  antagonism  from  wrenching  the  framework  of 
the  ship  of  state. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  CABINET 

Union  of  Executive  and  Legislature.  In  describ- 
ing a  government  in  which  the  executive  and  legisla- 
tive functions  are  so  much  united  in  the  same  hands, 
it  is  necessary  constantly  to  pass  from  one  to  the 
other.  So  we  return  to  the  Cabinet  in  discussing 
the  executive,  although  we  have  noticed  some  of  its 
features  in  describing  Parliament. 

Cabinet  and  Other  Positions.  The  Cabinet  con- 
sists of  the  heads  of  certain  executive  departments, 
about  twenty  in  number,  the  principal  ones  being 
the  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  who  is  generally 
Prime  Minister,  -the  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign 
Affairs,  the  Secretary  of  State  for  War,  the  Secretary 
of  State  for  Colonies,  the  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty, 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  and  the  President 
of  the  Local  Government  Board.  As  merely  a 
Minister,  each  of  these  men  heads  an  administrative 
and  executive  department ;  as  a  member  of  the  Cabi- 
net, or  a  Cabinet  Minister,  as  it  is  often  called,  he  is 

120 


The  Cabinet  121 

one  of  the  directing  council  which  carries  the  party 
program  through  Parliament  and  shapes  the  general 
policy  of  the  government. * 

The  Ministry,  as  explained  on  page  44,  includes 
in  addition  to  the  Cabinet  a  number  of  officials  of 
less  importance,  who,  like  the  Cabinet  Ministers, 
must  be  of  the  same  politics  as  the  party  in  power, 
and  hold  either  the  headship  of  certain  departments, 
high  executive  positions  of  the  second  rank,  or 
certain  ceremonial  positions  about  the  court.  Among 
them  are  most  of  the  first  assistants  of  the  leading 
Ministers  (called  Parliamentary  Under-Secretaries2), 
the  party  whips,  and  certain  officers  of  the  royal 
household  who  are  in  such  close  personal  touch  with 
the  King  that  they  must  not  be  of  such  political 
views  as  possibly  to  impair  the  harmonious  co-opera- 
tion of  the  sovereign  with  his  Ministers. 3 

Sinecures.  The  Cabinet  as  distinguished  from 
the  Ministry  is  a  counselling  and  directing  rather 
than  an  administrative  body.  Though  its  members 
are  the  heads  of  administrative  departments,  their 
chief  duties  are  shaping  and  directing  the  affairs  of 
government  and  carrying  out  the  party  policy  as  a 
consistent,  unified  platform,  while  the  details  of  ad- 

1  For  a  complete  list  of  the  Ministry,  with  the  Cabinet  positions 
specified,  see  table  at  end  of  this  chapter. 

3  Or  Political  Under-Secretaries. 

3  For  a  fuller  description  of  the  difference  between  the  Cabinet 
and  the  Ministry,  see  pages  44  and  45. 


122  The  Executive 

ministration  are  left  to  subordinates.  Hence  there 
are  several  sinecures,  or  offices  with  practically  no 
duties.  One  of  these,  the  First  Lordship  of  the 
Treasury  is  as  a  rule  held  by  the  Prime  Minister, 
whose  hands  are  full  enough  with  general  supervision 
and  the  responsibilities  of  leadership.  Three  others, 
the  positions  of  the  Lord  President  of  the  Council, 
the  Lord  Keeper  of  the  Privy  Seal,  and  the  Chancel- 
lor of  the  Duchy  of  Lancaster,  are  bestowed  often 
upon  aged  or  infirm  statesmen  whose  counsel  and 
experience  are  desired,  but  who  would  not  under- 
take the  arduous  duties  of  administration,  or  some- 
times upon  party  leaders  practically  all  of  whose 
time  is  required  upon  the  floor  of  Parliament.  While 
such  an  office  may  be  called  a  sinecure  viewed  as  an 
administrative  department,  it  may  as  a  position  of 
Cabinet  responsibility  be  anything  else. 

Concentration  of  Power  during  War.  The  growth 
of  the  Cabinet  in  recent  years  to  a  number  exceed- 
ing twenty  has  impaired  its  efficiency  as  a  directing 
council  and  tended  to  draw  it  more  into  the  character 
of  a  deliberating  body,  a  sort  of  select  third  house 
of  the  legislature  exclusively  in  the  hands  of  the 
party  in  power.  The  Premier  has  consequently 
fallen  into  the  habit  of  counselling  more  particularly 
with  a  few  of  his  most  trusted  colleagues,  thus  giving 
occasion  for  the  remark  that  there  was  emerging  a 
Cabinet  within  the  Cabinet.  This  tendency  to 


The  Cabinet  T 123 

gather  a  small  group,  capable  of  prompt  and  vigor- 
ous action,  around  the  leader  received  formal  sanc- 
tion in  the  creation  of  Mr.  Lloyd-George's  Ministry 
in  December,  1916,  during  the  Great  War.  The 
Premier,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  the  holder 
of  one  of  the  ancient  sinecures,  and  two  more  called 
"Minister  without  Portfolio"  were  made  "the War 
Cabinet/'  This  body  met  daily  to  direct  the  war, 
and  since  two  of  its  members  were  very  much  occu- 
pied on  the  floors  of  the  two  houses  of  Parliament  or 
in  the  Exchequer,  the  Premier  and  the  two  Ministers 
without  Portfolio  formed  a  group  reminding  one  of 
a  Roman  triumvirate  or  the  French  Consuls  of  1800 
with  Bonaparte  and  two  assistants.  Lord  Curzon's 
duties  as  leader  of  the  House  of  Lords  allowed  him 
to  attend  the  War  Cabinet  with  some  frequency, 
thus  supplying  a  fourth  member;  and  when  Mr. 
Law's  duties  permitted  him  to  leave  the  Commons 
and  the  Exchequer,  it  was  really  a  council  of  five. 

The  other  Ministers  usually  known  as  Cabinet 
Ministers  were  officially  designated  as  Heads  of 
Departments  and  took  no  part  in  the  direction  of 
the  war.  The  vital  Cabinet  duties  that  remained 
after  taking  out  of  their  hands  the  multifarious 
and  far-reaching  powers  connected  with  the  war 
left  them  in  a  situation  hardly  to  be  recognized  as  a 
Cabinet  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word.  The 
Premier  occupied  a  position  more  nearly  resembling 


124  The  Executive 

a  dictatorship  and  the  ordinary  Cabinet  meetings 
sank  to  a  lower  importance  than  at  any  time  in 
modern  English  history.  But  we  must  remember 
that  this  was  with  the  full  consent  of  Parliament, 
involved  no  suggestion  of  usurpation,  and  could  be 
terminated  at  any  time  by  a  simple  Parliamentary 
majority.  Though  the  future  will  hardly  see  such 
an  extreme  concentration  of  power  and  responsibil- 
ity in  so  few  men,  many  competent  judges  expect 
either  that  there  will  develop  a  permanent  and 
recognized  Cabinet  within  the  Cabinet  or  that  the 
Cabinet  will  be  reduced  in  numbers.  It  is  not  im- 
possible that  we  have  seen  the  beginning  of  a  process 
by  which  the  Cabinet  will  join  the  Privy  Council, 
which  it  shoved  aside,  as  an  interesting  historical 
relic  surviving  only  as  an  empty  form.  That  which 
emerged  through  the  law  of  change  may  submerge 
by  the  same  law. 

The  Cabinet  not  Known  to  the  Law.  It  may  be 
remarked  here  that  there  is  no  such  body  known  to 
the  law  as  the  Cabinet,  nor,  as  a  united  group,  the 
Ministry.  The  confidential  advisers  of  the  King 
are  supposed  to  be  the  Privy  Council ;  but  that  body, 
embracing  at  present  over  two  hundred  persons, 
long  ago  grew  to  be  so  large  as  to  make  counselling 
and  secrecy  impossible.  Membership  in  it  is  now 
only  a  distinction,  carrying  with  it  the  title  of  "Right 
Honourable."  Yet,  in  accordance  with  the  English 


The  Cabinet  125 

way  of  retaining  ancient  forms,  the  leading  Ministers 
on  first  taking  office  are  sworn  into  its  membership. 
The  lords  and  gentlemen  who  at  any  particular 
time  compose  the  Cabinet  are  the  real  successors  of 
those  ancient  advisers  and  are  in  fact  the  persons 
referred  to  in  modern  statutes  as  "His  Majesty's 
Most  Honourable  Privy  Council."1 

Difficulties  in  Forming  a  Ministry.2  The  gentle- 
man to  whom  the  King's  message  comes,  after  the 
resignation  of  a  Ministry  of  the  opposite  party,  direct- 
ing him  to  form  a  new  Ministry  has  probably  al- 
ready been  considering  with  himself  and  his  leading 
party  associates  the  persons  to  whom  he  shall  offer 
the  various  ministerial  posts.  The  presumptive 
claimants  are,  in  the  main,  the  same  men  who  were 
Ministers  when  their  party  was  last  in  power,  unless 
that  has  been  so  long  ago  that  the  old  leaders  have 
disappeared.  Forming  a  Ministry  is  sometimes 
extremely  difficult ;  for  rival  ambitions  must  be  some- 
how reconciled,  disappointed  aspirants  soothed, 
wounded  spirits  healed,  and  every  influential  wing 
in  the  party  given  representation  in  proportion  to 
its  strength.  The  task  of  the  Prime  Minister  calls 
for  the  most  delicate  tact,  as  well  as  great  firmness 

'See,  e.  g.,  the  British  North  America  Act,  ix.,  146.  The 
Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council  (see  page  202)  and  certain 
executive  departments  presided  over,  like  others,  by  a  Minister,  are 
nominally  committees  of  the  Privy  Council. 

2  Cf.  page  47. 


126 


The  Executive 


of  will  and  clearness  of  head;  for  a  great  victory  at 
the  polls  may  now  be  thrown  away  by  bad  general- 
ship. 

Discussions  in  Cabinet  Meetings.  A  bill  is  pre- 
pared by  the  Minister  whose  department  it  most 
nearly  concerns  and  is  then  discussed  in  Cabinet 
meeting.  Every  member  is  expected  to  suggest 
and  criticize  with  the  greatest  freedom  and  vigour, 
and  there  is  not  the  slightest  idea  that  in  doing  so 
he  is  intruding  upon  the  rights  of  the  department 
in  question.1 

The  Cabinet  meets  usually  once  a  week.    Mem- 

fe. 

bers  are  in  honour  bound  to  the  strictest  secrecy;  no 
minutes  are  kept,  and  even  a  private  memorandum 
is  looked  upon  with  disfavour. 

Unity  of  the  Cabinet.  The  Cabinet  must  be  a 
unit  upon  its  legislative  program,  and  hence  its 
members  can  introduce  no  measure  into  Parliament 
until  it  has  first  been  threshed  out  in  Cabinet  meet- 
ing and  brought  into  such  shape  as  to  induce  all 
members  to  accept  it,  or  at  least  to  refrain  from 
opposition.  Some  of  the  Prime  Minister's  hardest 
work  and  finest  argument  consists  in  convincing  his 
unwilling  colleagues.  Mr.  Gladstone  remarked  that 
it  was  sometimes  a  harder  task  to  get  his  meas- 
ures through  the  Cabinet  than  through  the  House 

1  Of  course  no  Minister  would  attempt  to  interfere  with  the 
routine  administration  of  another  department. 


The  Cabinet  127 

of  Commons.  The  Cabinet  is  thus  in  a  sense  a 
highly  competent  third  house  of  the  legislature; 
and  its  debates  result  in  removing  most  of  the 
weaknesses  of  bills  before  they  come  before  Parlia- 
ment. 

It  is  very  desirable  to  secure  the  willing  assent  and 
hearty  co-operation  of  the  entire  Cabinet,  and  hence 
it  is  always  sought  to  come  to  a  general  agreement 
without  overpowering  the  minority  by  a  formal 
vote. x 

Freedom  and  Restrictions  of  the  Individual  Cabinet 
Minister.  If  a  member  cannot  accept  the  views  of 
the  Cabinet  on  any  measure  and  considers  it  one 
that  he  cannot  conscientiously  allow  to  pass  in  silent 
acquiescence,  his  only  course  is  to  resign.  On  the 
other  hand,  a  Minister  must  not  express  himself  in 
public  on  any  Cabinet  measure  in  a  sense  contrary 
to  the  plans  of  the  Cabinet  or  take  up  a  position  that 
might  embarrass  his  associates  on  important  ques- 
tions on  which  the  Cabinet  has  not  come  to  a  deci- 
sion. Such  an  offence  would  lead  to  a  private 
remonstrance  from  the  Prime  Minister,  and  per- 
sistence in  it  would  make  it  necessary  for  that  official 
to  dismiss  his  indiscreet  associate  from  office.  A 
Minister  may,  however,  introduce  a  bill  on  his  own 
individual  responsibility  on  a  subject  that  is  not  in 
the  party  platforms  or  likely  to  become  a  matter  of 

'  Cf.  page  45. 


128 


The  Executive 


party  controversy,  and  may  speak  on  non-party 
questions  on  either  side  he  chooses. z 

Parliamentary  Under-Secretaries.  The  Minister 
at  the  head  of  several  of  the  more  important  execu- 
tive departments  has  an  assistant  minister,  called 
the  Parliamentary  Under-Secretary,  or  the  Political 
Under-Secretary.  The  duties  of  the  Minister2  are 
mainly  to  direct  the  general  policy  of  his  department, 
to  see  that  its  officers  are  competent  and  faithful, 
and  to  defend  in  Parliament  the  measures  of  the 
government,  particularly  those  concerning  his  own 
department.  He  makes  a  mistake  if  he  tries  to 
direct  too  minutely  the  work  of  subordinate  officials, 
just  as  the  captain  of  a  ship  might  if  he  sought  to 
teach  the  engineer  how  to  operate  the  engines. 

Frequently  the  Minister  and  his  Parliamentary 
Under-Secretary  are  members  of  different  houses, 
so  that  one  can  speak  for  the  department  in  the 
Commons  and  the  other  in  the  Lords;  but  in  some 
cases  the  labours  upon  the  floor  of  the  Commons  are 
so  incessant  as  to  require  both  to  be  members  of  that 
house.  The  duties  of  the  Under-Secretary  are 
much  the  same  as  those  of  his  chief,  except  that  he 
gives  more  of  his  time  to  the  details  of  administra- 
tion. He  is  usually  a  young  man  of  promise  in 


1  Cf.  page  45. 

3  The  duties  of  the  different  departments  are  described  in  Chapters 
XIII  and  XIV. 


The  Cabinet  129 

training  for  the  higher  positions,  and  if  he  makes  good 
as  a  successful  administrator  and  effective  debater, 
he  will  probably  by  middle  life  be  rewarded  by  being 
made  a  Cabinet  Minister  at  the  head  of  a  depart- 
ment. If  of  first  rank  in  the  gifts  of  leadership,  he 
may  even  attain  the  highest  goal  of  the  ambition  of 
every  man  in  English  national  politics,  the  Premier- 
ship, which  is  the  equivalent  in  England  to  the  hon- 
our of  being  made  President  in  the  United  States. 

Permanent  Under-Secretaries.  Under  the  Min- 
ister at  the  head  of  each  of  the  great  executive 
departments  is  a  Permanent  Under-Secietary.  He 
and  his  numerous  subordinates  are  picked  and 
trained  men  who  take  no  part  in  party  politics  and 
hold  their  positions  as  long  as  they  prove  efficient, 
irrespective  of  what  party  is  in  power. 

The  bulk  of  the  actual  running  of  the  department 
is  done  by  the  Permanent  Under-Secretary,  for  he 
is  master  of  every  detail  of  the  office  and  is  not 
interrupted  by  the  necessity  of  daily  attendance  on 
Parliament  during  six  or  seven  months  of  the  year. 
He  is  as  unswervingly  loyal  to  his  new  chief  after 
a  change  of  Ministry  as  to  his  old;  for  his  duty  is 
not  to  help  any  party,  but  solely  to  serve  the 
permanent  interests  of  the  country  by  doing  well 
whatever  the  people  through  their  representatives 
command  to  be  done.  The  Minister  would  not 
expect  nor  the  Permanent  Under-Secretary  consent 


130  The  Executive 

to  the  betrayal  of  any  personal  confidence  of  former 
Ministers.  But  he  of  course  furnishes  the  fullest 
information  on  everything  connected  with  the  official 
business  and  acts  of  the  department.  It  can  be 
easily  understood  that  the  advice  of  a  capable  Per- 
manent Under-Secretary  is  of  high  value  to  a  Minis- 
ter, and  that  his  influence  on  the  government  is 
great  and  useful.  Competent  judges  consider  that 
this  combination  of  the  judgment  of  the  trained  ex- 
pert and  that  of  the  statesman  of  wider  experience, 
fresh  from  the  great  outside  world  and  in  constant 
touch  with  its  untechnical  human  life,  is  an  essential 
factor  in  any  system  that  shall  at  the  same  time 
attain  the  efficiency  of  trained  skill  and  escape  the 
narrowness  and  stagnation  of  official  red  tape. * 

Cabinet  Positions 

The  holders  of  the  following  positions  were,  in 
1915,  members  of  the  Cabinet.  Sometimes  the 
Attorney-General  and  a  few  others  of  these  are 
members  of  the  Ministry  only,  but  not  of  the  Cabinet. 
Frequently  one  man  holds  one  of  the  sinecures  in 
addition  to  his  regular  department,  thus  making  the 
number  of  men  fewer  than  the  number  of  offices. 

First  Lord  of  the  Treasury  (almost  always  the 

Prime  Minister). 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer. 

1  See  Lowell's  Government  of  England,  i.,  176, 187-90. 


The  Cabinet  131 

Lord  High  Chancellor. 

Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home  Department. 

Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs. 

Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies. 

Secretary  of  State  for  India. 

Secretary  of  State  for  War. 

First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty. 

Minister  of  Munitions. 

Chief  Secretary  to  the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland. 

President  of  the  Board  of  Trade. 

President  of  the  Local  Government  Board. 

President  of  the  Board  of  Education. 

President  of  the  Board  of  Agriculture  and  Fisheries. 

Secretary  for  Scotland. 

Postmaster-General. 

First  Commissioner  of  Works. 

Attorney-General. 

Lord  Privy  Seal.1 

Lord  President  of  the  Council. r 

Chancellor  of  the  Duchy  of  Lancaster. x 

if 

The  Ministry  also  contains  the  following  members 
who  are  not  members  of  the  Cabinet: 

Solicitor-General . 

Lord  Advocate. 

Parliamentary  Under-Secretary  for  the  Home 
Department. 

Parliamentary  Under-Secretary  for  Foreign  Affairs. 

Parliamentary  Under-Secretary  for  the  Colonies. 

Parliamentary  Under-Secretary  for  India. 

Parliamentary  Under-Secretary  for  War. 

Two  Joint  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury  (one  called 
Parliamentary  or  Patronage  Secretary  of 
Treasury,  being  the  "chief  whip"). 

Three  Lords  Commissioners  of  the  Treasury  (the 
assistant ' '  whips  " ) . 

1  Sinecure. 


132  The  Executive 

The  three  "household  officials": 
Lord  Steward. 
Lord  Chamberlain. 
Master  of  the  Horse. 

SCOTLAND: 

Secretary  and  Keeper  of  the  Great  Seal. 
Lord  Justice-General. 
Lord  Advocate. 
Keeper  of  the  Privy  Seal- 
Lord  Justice  Clerk. 
Lord  Clerk  Register. 
Solicitor-General. 

IRELAND: 

Lord  Lieutenant. 
Lord  Chancellor. 
Attorney-General. 
Solicitor-General. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  PRIME  MINISTER1 

Gradual  Development  of  the  Premiership.  Be- 
fore taking  up  the  departments  separately,  we  must 
complete  our  study  of  the  Cabinet  as  the  united 
responsible  executive  branch  of  the  government  by 
some  further  description  of  the  position  of  the  Prime 
Minister.  This  great  office,  one  of  the  three  most 
eminent  political  positions  in  the  world, 2  has  grown 
up  under  the  custom  of  the  constitution,  and  in 
fact  was  never  even  referred  to  in  any  law  until 
I9o6.3  Robert  Walpole,  from  1721  to  1742,  was 
the  first  Prime  Minister,  and  the  position  was  at 
first  regarded  with  jealous  dread.  But  the  utility 
of  having  executive  authority  centred  in  one  person 
caused  the  position  continuously  to  grow  in  power 

1  See  list  of  Prime  Ministers,  by  parties  and  dates,  since  1830, 
at  end  of  this  chapter. 

3  The  other  two  being  those  of  the  American  President  and  the 
German  Chancellor.  The  powerful  sovereigns  of  Germany  and 
Russia  are  not  considered,  because  as  hereditary  monarchs  they 
fall  into  a  different  class.  3  Lowell,  i.,  68. 

133 


134  The  Executive 

and  esteem  until  it  has  come  to  be  imitated  in  almost 
all  free  countries  of  the  world  that  have  not  followed 
the  American  plan  called  Presidential  government.1 

Preferably  a  Member  of  the  Lower  House.  The 
Premier,  as  the  Prime  Minister  is  often  called,  may 
be  either  a  lord  or  a  commoner;  but  the  concentra- 
tion of  power  in  the  Commons  makes  it  much  better 
for  him  to  be  a  member  of  the  ' '  lower ' '  house.  Being 
Prime  Minister  does  not  remove  a  Lord's  incapacity 
to  appear  upon  the  floor  of  the  Commons.  He  would 
thus  have  to  be  represented  in  the  field  of  conflict 
by  some  trusted  subordinate,  known  as  the  leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  who,  as  being  of  subordinate 
authority,  could  do  full  justice  neither  to  himself, 
his  chief,  nor  his  party. 

General  Character  of  the  Position.  As  an  aid  to 
reaching  a  clear  understanding  of  the  position  of  the 
Premier,  let  us  remember  that  he  answers  more 
nearly  than  any  other  person  in  the  English  Govern- 
ment to  the  President  in  the  United  States.  As  he 
is  charged  with  the  responsibility  for  the  entire 
administration,  he,  like  the  President,  has  no  sepa- 
rate administrative  department  under  his  charge, 
but  holds  one  of  the  sinecures  in  the  Cabinet. 2  Oc- 
casionally a  man  of  rare  ability  and  energy  in  addi- 

1  For  the  definition  of  Parliamentary  and  Presidential  govern- 
ment, see  above,  page  8. 

a  See  page  121  for  names  and  explanation  of  these  positions. 


The  Prime  Minister  135 

tion  to  the  weighty  responsibilities  of  the  Premier- 
ship also  administers  a  particular  department,  as, 
e.  g.,  Mr.  Gladstone's  being  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer or  Lord  Salisbury's  being  Foreign  Secretary 
at  the  same  time  that  he  was  head  of  the  govern- 
ment ;  but  in  the  case  of  the  latter,  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  the  Premier  must  in  any  event  give  much 
attention  to  foreign  affairs,  and  that  Salisbury  by 
reason  of  his  seat  in  the  Lords  was  spared  the  inces- 
sant labours  which  fall  to  a  Prime  Minister  who  is 
the  leader  of  his  party  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
Though  the  exception  in  the  case  of  Lord  Salisbury 
is  thus  more  apparent  than  real,  no  such  considera- 
tions relieved  the  situation  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Glad- 
stone, who  twice  held  both  the  Premiership  and  the 
Chancellorship  of  the  Exchequer,  itself  one  of  the 
most  burdensome  portfolios.  Mr.  Asquith,  for  a 
short  time  during  his  Premiership,  assumed  also  the 
duties  of  the  Secretaryship  of  State  for  War;  but 
this  was  from  the  first  recognized  as  a  temporary 
expedient,  and  was  terminated  by  the  appointment 
of  Lord  Kitchener  to  that  department  as  soon  as 
its  duties  assumed  unusual  importance.  Such  in- 
stances are  sure  to  become  still  more  exceptional 
under  the  greater  mass  of  duties  which  recent  times 
have  brought.  Consequently  it  is  usual  for  the  head 
of  the  Ministry  to  hold  the  office  of  First  Lord  of 
the  Treasury,  an  ancient  post  of  honour  whose 


136  The  Executive 

duties  have  been  transferred  to  other  treasury 
officials. 

The  Premier's  General  Supervision  of  Other 
Departments.  It  is  understood,  of  course,  that  the 
Premier  selects  all  the  other  Ministers,  though  he 
and  they  alike  are  officially  appointed  by  the  King. 
He  directs  the  general  policy  of  the  whole  govern- 
ment, and  must  be  consulted  on  every  matter  of 
importance  which  arises  in  any  department.  Since 
he  directs  the  general  policy  of  all  departments,  he 
must  know  of  their  conditions  and  tasks,  which 
involves  a  vast  amount  of  labour  and  study.  Every 
Minister  has  a  right  to  his  counsel  at  any  time,  and 
indeed  must  consult  him  before  taking  a  new  course 
or  introducing,  even  in  Cabinet  meetings,  a  measure 
of  importance. 

The  fact  that  the  Prime  Minister  exercises  a  con- 
stant supervision  over  the  Foreign  Office,  and  the 
reason  for  this,  are  explained  at  pages  112  to  114, 
which  should  be  re-read  at  this  point. 

Settling  Differences  between  Ministers.  If  dif- 
ferences arise  between  Ministers  they  must  be 
referred  to  the  Prime  Minister.  His  decision,  how- 
ever, is  not  necessarily  final;  for  in  these  clashes 
between  colleagues  in  matters  relating  to  their 
departments,  or  in  regard  to  any  decision  of  the 
Premier  as  to  measures  or  policy,  a  dissatisfied 
Minister  may  carry  his  grievance  to  the  Cabinet, 


The  Prime  Minister  137 

either  by  friendly  agreement  with  the  Premier  or 
without  regard  to  his  wishes  in  an  attempt  to  over- 
ride him.  The  extent  to  which  the  head  of  a  Min- 
istry will  submit  to  such  appeals  or  reversals  of  his 
policy  depends  upon  the  vigour  of  his  personality 
and  his  hold  upon  his  Cabinet;  but  it  is  safe  to  say 
that  one  who  often  submitted  to  such  treatment 
could  not  long  hold  his  position. 

The  Minister  who  is  overruled  must  either  loyally 
submit  or  resign. 

The  Premier's  Appointing  Power.  In  addition 
to  these  duties  the  Prime  Minister  appoints  all  the 
more  important  officials,  as  £.  g.,  his  fellow-Ministers, 
ambassadors,  bishops,  all  the  higher  men  in  the  vari- 
ous departments,  and  the  highest  judges.  Of  this 
last  group  are  the  Lord  Chancellor,  the  Lord  Chief 
Justice,  the  Lords  of  Appeal  in  Ordinary,  who  dis- 
charge for  the  House  of  Lords  its  functions  of  a 
supreme  court,  and  the  Lords  Justices  of  Appeal, 
who  hold  the  highest  court  of  appeal  below  the  House 
of -Lords.  All  other  judges  are  appointed  by  the 
Lord  Chancellor.1  The  varied  duties  of  guiding- 
legislation  in  Parliament,  marshalling  party  forces, 
and  conducting  administration  call  for  character 
and  ability  of  the  highest  order. 

As  the  Ministry  is  appointed  by  the  Prime  Minis- 
ter, it  also  hangs  upon  him.  The  resignation  of 

1  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915,  p.  36. 


138  The  Executive 

any  other  Minister  only  creates  a  vacancy,  but  his 
resignation  or  death  puts  an  end  to  that  Ministry 
entirely.  If  he  should  resign  because  of  (say)  ill 
health,  or  any  cause  other  than  a  defeat  in  Parlia- 
ment, the  King  would,  of  course,  appoint  as  his 
successor  the  one  among  his  colleagues  who  at  the 
time  stood  next  in  party  leadership,  and  the  new 
Premier  would  make  up  his  Ministry  of  very  much 
the  same  men  already  in  office,  though  he  would 
probably  take  advantage  of  the  opportunity  to 
shoulder  out  a  few  members  who  had  disappointed 
expectations.  It  would  nevertheless  be  a  new 
Ministry  and  would  be  called  by  his  name,  as  when 
Mr.  Gladstone's  fourth  Ministry  was  succeeded  by 
Lord  Rosebery's,  or  Lord  Salisbury's  third  by  Mr. 
Balfour's. 

Prime  Ministers  Since  the  Passage  of  the  Great  Reform 
Act  of  2832. 

"•LORD  GREY  (Liberal)  1830-34 

""LORD  MELBOURNE  (first  Ministry — Liberal)  July-Nov.  1834 

SIR  ROBERT  PEEL  (first  Ministry — Conservative)  1834-35 

WLORD  MELBOURNE  (second  Ministry — Liberal)  1835-41 

SIR  ROBERT  PEEL  (second  Ministry — Conservative)  1841-46 

"•"LORD  JOHN  RUSSELL  (first  Ministry — Liberal)  1846-52 

LORD  DERBY  (first  Ministry — Conservative)  Feb.-Dec.  1852 

"^LORD  ABERDEEN  (coalition  Liberal-Peelite1)  1852-55 

1  The  Peelites,  followers  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  after  he  lost  the  sup- 
port of  the  bulk  of  the  Conservative  party  by  repealing  the  tariff 
on  grain,  generally  drifted  into  the  Liberal  Party. 


The  Prime  Minister  139 

*-  LORD  PALMERSTON  (first  Ministry — Liberal)  1855-58 

LORD  DERBY  (second  Ministry — Conservative)  1858-59 

--LORD  PALMERSTON  (second  Ministry — Liberal)  1859-65 

^LORD  JOHN  RUSSELL  (second  Ministry — Liberal)  1865-66 

LORD  DERBY  (third  Ministry — Conservative)  1866-68 
BENJAMIN  DISRAELI'  (first  Ministry — Conservative)  Feb.- 

Dec.  1868 

^  WILLIAM  E.  GLADSTONE  (first  Ministry — Liberal)  1868-74 

DISRAELI  (second  Ministry — Conservative)  1874-80 

-GLADSTONE  (second  Ministry — Liberal)  1880-85 

LORD  SALISBURY  (first  Ministry — Conservative)  1885-86 

^GLADSTONE  (third  Ministry — Liberal)  Feb.-July  1886 

LORD  SALISBURY  (second  Ministry — Conservative)  1886-92 

"— GLADSTONE  (fourth  Ministry — Liberal)  1892-94 

-  LORD  ROSEBERY  (Liberal)  1894-95 

LORD  SALISBURY  (third  Ministry — Conservative)  1895-1902 

ARTHUR  BALFOUR  (Conservative)  1902-05 

-SIR  HENRY  CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN  (Liberal)  1905-08 

£  HENRY  HERBERT  ASQUITH  (Liberal  to  1915;  from  1915 

coalition  Liberal- Conservative)  1908-16 
DAVID  LLOYD-GEORGE  (coalition  Liberal-Conservative)        1916- 

1  From  1876,  Earl  of  Beaconsfield. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  TREASURY 

Importance  of  the  Chancellorship  of  the  Exchequer. 

The  Minister  over  the  treasury  department  is  called 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  There  are  cer- 
tain boards  and  officers  but  they  have  no  control. 
The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  is  one  of  the  most 
important  members  of  the  government,  for  two 
reasons;  first,  he  has  the  general  oversight  over  the 
amount  of  money  which  each  department  shall 
spend ;  and  second  he  devises  the  taxes  by  which  the 
government  is  supported.  He  has  thus  a  sort  of 
superintendence  over  both  income  and  outgo.  This 
is  the  office  in  which  Mr.  Gladstone  made  himself 
famous  as  a  Cabinet  Minister  and  in  which  Mr. 
Lloyd-George  at  a  later  time  made  himself  so  pas- 
sionately hated  and  admired.  It  is  an  office  which, 
with  the  fearful  burden  of  war  debts  and  the  growing 
tendency  to  correct  social  and  economic  injustices 
by  means  of  taxation,  promises  to  become  still  more 
important  in  future.  Its  holder  is  looked  upon  as 

140 


The  Treasury  141 

second  in  importance  only  to  the  Prime  Minister; 
and  if  he  measures  up  to  the  wider  responsibilities 
of  his  position,  he  is  manifestly  material  for  the 
making  of  a  future  head  of  the  government. 

Preparing  the  Estimates.  In  the  autumn  in  pre- 
paring his  proposals  to  be  made  to  Parliament  in 
the  following  February,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer has  the  head  of  every  other  department 
give  him  an  itemizedjestimate  of  the  exact  sums  of 
money  which  will  be  needed  to  support  his  depart- 
ment for  the  coming  year.  These  estimates  are 
made  out  by  the  experienced  under-officials  and  are 
passed  upon  by  the  head  of  the  department  in  ques- 
tion. If  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  objects 
to  any  item  or  wishes  to  reduce  its  amount,  hejind 
the  Minister  seek  to  adjust  the  matter.  If  they 
cannot  agree,  they  carry  it  to  the  Prime  Minister, 
and  if  he  cannot  bring  them  together,  they  take  it 
before  the  Cabinet,  whose  decision  is  final. 

Control  over  Other  Departments.  The  Treasury 
also  has  the  right  to  veto  certain  contracts  by  other 
departments,  to  forbid  changes  in  the  departments 
which  are  likely  to  involve  later  expense,  and  to 
authorize  a  department  to  use  for  another  purpose 
any  surplus  moneys  remaining  over  from  the  de- 
partment's apportionment  or  from  other  unexpended 
appropriations.  And  lastly,  the  Treasury  has  at 
its  disposal  a  certain  limited  sum  which  it  may  use 


142  The  Executive 

for  any  emergency,  though  there  may  have  been  no 
law  passed  for  that  particular  object.1  Money 
matters  are  liable  to  lead  men  into  complications, 
difficulties,  and  burdensome  extravagances,  and' 
hence  these  wide  powers  of  oversight  which  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  as  guardian  of  the 
national  purse  is  given  over  his  associates. 

The  Budget.  Having  received  the  estimates 
from  the  various  departments  and  finally  scaled 
them  to  the  amounts  at  which  they  are  to  stand,  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  is  ready  to  report  his 
budget.  This  consists  of  all  the  items  of  expense  for 
the  various  departments  and  the  taxes  by  which  it 
is  proposed  to  meet  them.  After  having  been  gone 
over  in  Cabinet  meeting,  it  is  presented  to  the  House 
of  Commons  sitting  in  Committee  of  the  Whole 
soon  after  the  opening  of  Parliament  in  February. 
Its  passage  through  Parliament  is  described  at 
page  63. 

Sources  of  the  Revenue.  The  revenues  are  chiefly 
from  the  tariff,  or  customs  duties,  income  and  in- 
heritance taxes,  the  internal  revenue,  and  the  post- 
office.  Import  duties  are  imposed  for  revenue  only, 
on  tea,  coffee,  chicory,  dried  fruit,  tobacco,  wine, 
whiskey,  and  a  few  other  articles,  and  in  order  to 
avoid  giving  any  advantage  by  "protection"  to  one 
business  over  another,  an  equal  internal  revenue  is 

1  Lowell,  i.,  124-6. 


The  Treasury  143 

collected  on  any  of  these  articles  produced  within 
the  country.1 
Fixed   Charges   and  Annual  Appropriations.    A 

few  charges  of  a  permanent  and  steady  character 
are  fixed  by  a  standing  law  and  do  not  have  to  be 
voted  annually.  These  are  interest  on  the  public 
debt,  the  support  of  the  royal  family,  the  salaries  of 
judges,  and  a  few  others  of  trivial  amount2;  but  all 
other  appropriations  are  for  one  year  only,  and 
hence  the  budget  is  an  annual  task.  The  origin  of 
this  custom  was  connected  with  the  long  struggle 
of  the  representatives  of  the  people  to  restrain  the 
despotism  of  the  King.  At  last  the  custom  was 
adopted  of  allowing  the  government  revenues  for 
one  year  only,  and  of  permitting  the  maintenance 
and  discipline  of  the  standing  army  for  one  year 
only.  So  long  as  these  two  rules  are  observed, 
tyranny  is  impossible. 

1  We  should  bear  in  mind  that  our  entire  discussion  at  this  point 
is  confined  to  the  finances  of  the  central,  or  general,  government  of 
the  United  Kingdom.  Every  city,  county,  and  parish  in  England, 
Ireland,  and  Scotland,  as  well  as  every  colony  in  the  Empire,  has 
its  own  income  from  taxation  by  which  to  meet  its  own  public  ex- 
penses, without  any  connection  with  the  finances  of  the  central 
government,  except  that  the  central  government  to  a  certain  extent 
contributes  to  the  assistance  of  certain  local  governments. 

"Lowell,  i.,  120.     Cf.  page  26  above  and  note. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

OTHER  EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENTS 

Foreign  Affairs,  Colonies,  and  India.  These  three 
departments  include  some  of  the  most  important 
duties  with  which  the  government  is  charged.  They 
are  not  treated  in  this  chapter,  where  they  might  be 
logically  expected,  for  the  reason  that  a  full  account 
is  given  at  other  places  at  which  some  notice  of  them 
is  necessary  in  connection  with  associated  topics. 
The  duties  of  the  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign 
Affairs  are  described  at  page  113,  of  the  Secretary 
of  State  for  the  Colonies  at  pages  270  and  272,  and 
of  the  Secretary  of  State  for  India  at  pages  311  and 
following. 

War 

The  War  Office  and  the  Minister  of  Munitions. 

The  Secretary  of  State  for  War  has  nothing  to  do 
with  determining  questions  of  war  and  peace,  except 
as  every  Minister  has  by  his  influence  and  vote. 
His  duty  is  to  see  that  the  country's  army  is  kept  in 
proper  condition  to  meet  the  emergency  should  war 

144 


Other  Executive  Departments      145 

arise.  The  Secretary  of  State  for  War  is  assisted  by 
a  small  board  or  council  consisting  of  the  chief  officers 
of  the  army,  but  they  cannot  veto  or  in  any  way 
control  his  acts. 

An  excellent  illustration  of  the  flexibility  of  the 
ministerial  system  was  afforded  during  the  Great 
War  by  the  creation  of  >a  new  department  to  relieve 
the  Secretary  of  State  for  War  of  a  part  of  his  duties, 
to  redistribute  the  unusual  burdens,  and  to  meet  the 
peculiar  problems  of  a  situation  which  threatened 
to  overwhelm  a  government  and  people  organized  so 
preponderatingly  for  peace  as  to  find  themselves 
almost  entirely  unprepared  for  a  gigantic  struggle  of 
land  forces.  The  situation  was  mixed  up  with  the 
personality  of  two  of  the  existing  Ministry.  Lord 
Kitchener,  in  charge  of  the  War  Office,  was  excel- 
lently qualified  for  the  duties  of  raising  and  directing 
a  vast  army,  but  very  much  lacked  certain  qualities 
necessary  to  meet  the  economic  and  human  elements 
of  the  problem  of  drawing  out  the  industrial  forces 
for  equipping  his  soldiers.  The  Ministry  of  Muni- 
tions was  created  and  placed  in  charge  of  David 
Lloyd-George,  a  man  of  great  executive  ability  and 
wonderful  talent  for  bringing. the  English  working- 
man,  jealous  of  his  individual  and  trade-union  privi- 
leges, into  such  subordination  to  the  great  national 
effort  as  to  save  the  state  from  being  overwhelmed 
by  the  military  organization  of  Germany. 

10 


146  The  Executive 

The  duties  of  the  Minister  of  Munitions  are  to 
exercise  such  supervision  over  government  and  pri- 
vate manufactories  as  to  secure  the  most  loyal  and 
efficient  co-operation  of  employers  and  labourers, 
and  hence  the  largest  possible  output  of  arms  and 
ammunition  for  the  armies  at  the  front.  Even  private 
plants  are  reduced  to  a  semi-military  organization, 
and  the  control  of  private  business  is  carried  further 
than  modern  England  has  ever  before  dreamed  of 
permitting. 

Other  ministerial  positions  created  to  meet  the 
necessities  of  the  Great  War  were  the  Minister  of 
Blockade,  the  Food  Controller,  and  the  Shipping 
Controller. 

The  Army.  Before  the  Great  War,  the  armed 
land  force  of  the  United  Kingdom  consisted  of  the 
regular  army,  the  army  reserve,  the  special  reserve, 
and  the  territorial  army.  Men  enlisted  in  the  regu- 
lar army  for  twelve  years.  Most  served  seven  years 
of  this  time  with  the  colours  and  five  years  with  the 
army  reserve.  The  special  reserve  consisted  of 
men  enlisted  for  six  years.  They  were  given  five 
months  in  camp  the  first  year  and  a  few  weeks' 
training  every  year  for  the  remaining  five.  The 
reserves  of  both  kinds  are  at  once  called  to  the  front 
in  case  of  need. 

The  territorial  army  consisted  of  what  in  the 
United  States  is  called  the  militia.  The  men  were 


Other  Executive  Departments      147 

given  two  weeks'  instruction  in  camp  every  year. 
They  could  not,  without  their  consent,  be  sent  out 
of  the  country. I 

In  a  great  war  the  regular  army  was  increased 
by  voluntary  enlistments.  England's  system  was 
entirely  voluntary,  unlike  the  systems  of  countries 
on  the  continent  of  Europe,  which,  having  powerful 
rival  states  immediately  upon  their  borders,  consider 
it  necessary  to  force  all  able-bodied  men  to  serve 
for  a  term  of  years  in  the  army.  In  the  gigantic 
conflict  with  Germany  and  her  allies  England  raised 
a  volunteer  army  of  five  million  men — 'incomparably 
the  greatest  expression  of  patriotic  devotion  through 
voluntary  enlistments  that  the  world  has  ever  seen. 
But  it  finally  proved  necessary  to  adopt  conscrip- 
tion in  order  to  draw  out  the  full  military  resources 
of  the  country.  The  Great  War  has  so  revolution- 
ized the  British  army  and  military  ideas  as  to  render 
it  doubtful  whether  the  system  previously  in  opera- 
tion will  long  be  retained.  The  near  future  will 
reveal  whether  England  will  modify  her  previous 
system  as  described  above  more  or  less  towards  the 
continental  system  of  universal  compulsory  service 
in  times  of  peace. 

Organization  of  the  Navy  Department.  The 
navy  is  under  the  Board  of  Admiralty,  whose  head 
is  a  Cabinet  Minister,  called  the  First  Lord  of  the 

1  The  "yeomanry"  are  simply  the  cavalry  part  of  the  militia. 


148  The  Executive 

Admiralty.  He  has  general  direction,  and  the  other 
eight  members  (most  of  them  eminent  naval  officers) 
have  charge  of  various  branches  of  the  naval  service. 
These  are,  of  course,  not  in  the  Ministry. 

The  management  of  modern  war  vessels  requires 
long  and  careful  training.  Hence  the  naval  force 
consists  of  men  enlisted  for  a  term  of  twelve  years. 

The  Committee  of  Imperial  Defence.  For  the 
consideration  of  the  large  problems  of  naval  and 
military  policy,  apart  from  the  more  technical  ques- 
tions which  naturally  fall  to  the  army  and  navy  de- 
partments, there  is  the  Committee  of  Imperial 
Defence.  It  consists  of  the  Prime  Minister  as  chair- 
man, together  with  the  heads  of  the  departments  of 
foreign  affairs,  war,  navy,  treasury,  colonies,  and 
India,  the  Chief  of  the  Imperial  General  Staff,  and 
several  other  high  naval  and  military  officials.  It 
has  its  regular  permanent  secretary  and  pursues 
a  continuous  policy  in  organizing  the  nation's 
resources  against  the  emergency  of  war. 

Contrasts  between  Foreign  and  Home  Affairs. 
It  is  remarkable  how  much  of  the  business  of  the 
government,  even  in  time  of  peace,  is  taken  up  with 
affairs  away  from  home.  There  is  constant  danger 
that  an  ambitious  statesman  will  be  so  dazzled  with 
the  idea  of  playing  a  brilliant  part  in  the  stirring 
affairs  of  world  politics  that  he  will  allow  the  more 
direct  interests  of  the  people  and  the  more  prosaic 


Other  Executive  Departments       149 

things  making  for  their  permanent  welfare  to  suffer 
neglect.  On  the  other  hand,  a  Prime  Minister  whose 
heart  is  warm  for  doing  good  for  his  own  people  may 
forget  the  necessity  for  strength  and  foresighted 
planning  in  foreign  and  imperial  affairs.  Disraeli 
and  Gladstone  among  modern  English  statesmen 
illustrate  respectively  in  striking  fashion  these 
opposing  tendencies. 

Internal  Interests  of  the  Kingdom 

So  far  in  this  chapter  we  have  been  taken  up  with 
the  departments  concerned  with  foreign  and  imperial 
interests.  Let  us  turn  now  to  those  which  touch 
more  immediately  the  life  of  the  people. 

The  Home  Department  is  under  the  Secretary  of 
State  for  the  Home  Department,  or,  as  he  is  briefly 
called,  the  Home  Secretary.  He  is  in  charge  of  a 
great  variety  of  duties,  such  as  granting  or  refusing 
petitions  for  the  pardon  of  criminals,  the  supervision 
of  the  police,  and  the  management  of  prisons.  He 
also  appoints  and  removes  certain  city  magistrates, 
and  has  the  duty  of  enforcing,  through  a  corps  of 
inspectors  and  commissioners,  the  numerous  laws 
regulating  the  hours,  safety,  and  conditions  of  labour 
in  mines  and  factories.  In  addition  to  all  these 
numerous  duties,  requiring  an  infinite  acquaintance 
with  detail,  he  has  a  right  of  veto  over  the  by-laws 


150  The  Executive 

of  county  and  city  councils,  except  in  the  case  of 
nuisances. 

It  is  understood  of  course  that  all  these  things 
are  said  to  be  done  by  the  King  and  that  the  Secre- 
tary simply  advises  such  or  such  action.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  as  in  all  the  other  departments,  the 
King  is  the  one  who  may  merely  advise,  and  the 
word  of  the  Secretary  is  the  word  that  controls. 

The  Local  Government  Board.  A  Cabinet  Min- 
ister called  the  President  of  the  Local  Government 
Board  has  control  over  poor  relief,  old  age  pensions, 
registration  of  births  and  deaths,  sanitation,  roads, 
etc.  He  also  exercises  oversight  of  the  local  legisla- 
tive bodies  of  the  counties  and  cities  with  a  large 
degree  of  authority  for  preventing  imprudent  or 
extravagant  action. 

A  peculiar  illustration -of  the  difference  so  often 
observed  between  the  nominal  and  the  real  in  the 
English  Constitution,  is  the  fact  that  the  Local 
Government  Board  and  the  four  or  five  other  boards 
whose  heads  hold  the  positions  of  responsible  Cabi- 
net Ministers  are  nothing  more,  as  Professor  Lowell 
expresses  it,  than  phantom  boards.  The  President 
is  a  quorum  and  conducts  the  business,  and  the 
Board  never  meets. 

The  Board  of  Trade.  The  President  of  the  Board 
of  Trade  is  a  Cabinet  Minister  of  great  importance, 
in  that  he  has  general  supervision  over  railroads, 


Other  Executive  Departments       151 

trolley  lines,  the  equipment  and  safety  of  merchant 
vessels,  and  the  granting  of  copyrights  and  patents 
giving  authors  or  inventors  the  sole  right  to  sell 
their  productions.  His  control  is  exercised  through 
"provisional  orders "  made  after  investigation  on 
the  complaint  of  aggrieved  persons  or  on  his 
own  motion.  Such  orders,  if  not  complied  with, 
are  given  force  of  law  through  confirmation  by 
Parliament. 

The  railway  problem  in  England,  as  in  the  United 
States,  has  called  for  special  regulation.  Parliament 
fixes  maximum  rates,  allows  the  Board  of  Trade 
extensive  powers  in  provisional  orders,  and  provides 
a  court  known  as  the  Railway  and  Canal  Com- 
mission, composed  of  judges  and  railway  business 
experts.  To  this  body  the  Local  Government  Board 
may  refer  any  case  in  which  their  orders  touching 
common  carriers  by  land  or  water  within  the  United 
Kingdom  are  disregarded.  The  functions  of  the 
Commission  are  similar  to  those  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  in  the  United  States,  but 
its  powers  are  more  extensive  and  stronger.  The 
English  Commission  can  regulate  more  subjects, 
such  as  the  safety  of  passengers,  the  safety  and 
hours  of  employees,  sidetrack  and  terminal  facilities, 
and  correcting  unjust  and  unreasonable  rates,  though 
it  has  so  far  declined  to  accept  the  doctrine  that  it 
may  undertake  the  fixing  of  general  rates  ab  initio. 


152  The  Executive 

Non-compliance  with  its  orders  incurs  a  penalty  of 
£100  a  day.  More  important,  it  is  not  merely  a 
commission,  as  its  name  would  imply,  but  really  a 
court.  Its  findings  are  final  in  all  matters  of  fact, 
but  appeal  lies  from  its  decisions  in  points  of  law  to 
the  Court  of  Appeal,  the  highest  court  of  civil  juris- 
diction below  the  House  of  Lords.1 

The  Post-Office.  The  Postmaster-General  in 
England  has  supervision  over  the  telegraph  and 
telephone,  as  those  have  been  made  parts  of  the 
postal  service  under  government  ownership  and 
management  as  an  obvious  means  for  the  transmis- 
sion of  news.2  The  parcel  post,  rural  free  delivery, 
and  postal  savings  banks  are  highly  developed. 
The  Postmaster-General  is  thus  not  a  political 
character  in  any  such  sense  as  the  Foreign  Secretary 
or  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  but  is  in  effect 
the  head  of  a  vast  business. 

The  population  of  England  is  so  dense  and  distances 
so  short  as  to  give  the  post-office  a  great  advantage 
as  compared  with  the  post-office  in  a  country  of  vast 
extent,  like  the  United  States,  including  many  long 

TFor  the  Court  of  Appeal  and  the  House  of  Lords,  see  pages 
182  and  199-200  below.  On  the  functions  of  the  Board  of  Trade  and 
the  Commission,  see  elaborate  statement  in  Ripley's  Railway  Prob- 
lems, 602-49,  reprinting  "  The  English  Railway  and  Canal  Commis- 
sion," by  S.  J.  McLean,  from  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  xx. 
(1905),  1-55;  brief  statement,  Britannica,  ii.,  213;  xxii.,  227-8. 

'Telegraph  was  taken  over  by  the  government  in  1870;  the  tele- 
phone in  1912. 


Other  Executive  Departments       153 

and  thinly  settled  stretches;  and  hence  the  vast 
business  of  the  English  post-office  nets  the  govern- 
ment a  handsome  revenue. 

Agriculture  and  Education.  These  departments 
are  each  generally  under  a  Minister  who  is  counted 
a  member  of  the  Cabinet.  Though  their  depart- 
ments are  not  strictly  political,  as  are  most  of  the 
others,  the  vital  importance  of  the  interests  com- 
mitted to  their  charge  leads  generally  to  their  heads 
being  included  in  the  Cabinet. 

Law  Officers 

No  Department  of  Justice.  England  has  no  dis- 
tinct department  of  justice  like  most  modern  coun- 
tries. The  duties  of  such  a  department  are 
distributed  among  the  Home  Secretary,  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  and  the  Law  Officers  of  the  Crown. 
The  first  has  already  been  described ;  a  few  words  will 
indicate  the  general  character  of  the  others. 

The  Lord  Chancellor  is  one  of  the  most  ancient 
officials  of  the  kingdom  and  is  still  one  of  great  im- 
portance as  the  head  of  the  judicial  system.  It  is 
strange  that  the  official  answering  to  the  Chief 
Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  United  States 
as  the  presiding  head  of  the  highest  court  in  the  land, 
should  go  into  and  out  of  office  as  a  member  of  the 
Cabinet  with  the  changes  of  political  parties;  but, 
like  many  usages  of  the  English  Government  that 


154  The  Executive 

appear  absurd  upon  their  face,  this  works  well  be- 
cause not  abused.  The  Lord  Chancellorship  repre- 
sents the  highest  ambition  of  English  lawyers. 

Judicial  Duties  of  the  Lord  Chancellor.  The  Lord 
Chancellor's  judicial  duties  are  now  to  sit  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Court  of  Appeal  (next  to  the  highest 
court  in  the  land),  to  sit  with  the  Lords  of  Appeal 
in  the  House  of  Lords  when  that  house  is  acting  as 
the  supreme  court  of  the  United  Kingdom,  and  to 
sit  as  a  member  of  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
the  Privy  Council,  which  is  the  supreme  court 
for  questions  coming  from  the  church  and  from 
colonial  courts. x 

The  Lord  Chancellor's  Appointing  Power.  The 
Lord  Chancellor  appoints  the  county  judges  and  the 
justices  of  the  peace,  in  the  selection  of  whom  he  is 
guided  by  information  and  advice  from  local  officials; 
and  he  also  chooses  all  the  higher  judges,  except 
himself,  the  Lord  Chief  Justice,  and  the  Lords  of 
Appeal  in  Ordinary,  who  are  selected  by  the  Prime 
Minister.  The  Lord  Chancellor  also  appoints  many 
preachers  of  the  Church  of  England  to  congregations 
whose  pastors  are  in  the  appointment  of  the  Crown. 

As  Presiding  Officer  of  the  House  of  Lords.  An- 
other duty  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  is  to  preside  over 

xThe  judicial  system  is  described  in  Chapters  XVI-XVIII. 
Although  the  House  of  Lords  is  legally  the  supreme  court,  only  the 
learned  judges  who  are  members  ever  take  part  in  those  duties. 


Other  Executive  Departments      155 

the  House  of  Lords.  His  functions  and  powers  in 
that  position  have  already  been  described  at  page 
96,  which  should  be  re-read  here  as  a  part  of  this 
chapter. 

Mingling  of  Functions  in  the  Lord  Chancellor. 
This  ancient  official  therefore  represents  in  the 
highest  degree  the  combination  of  the  powers  of 
government  in  the  same  hands,  as  opposed  to  the 
American  principle  of  their  separation  among  differ- 
ent departments ;  for  he  is  a  real  member  of  the  exe- 
cutive in  being  a  Cabinet  Minister,  an  active  judge 
in  the  three  highest  courts,  and  when  a  peer  (as  he 
practically  always  is),  a  member  of  the  upper  house 
of  the  legislature,  in  which  he  may  not  only  vote, 
but  may  leave  the  chair  and  take  part  in  debate. 

The  Attorney-General  and  the  Solicitor-General. 
The  principal  law  officers  of  the  Crown  are  the 
Attorney-General  and  his  colleague  and  substitute 
the  Solicitor-General.  These  are  always  members 
of  the  Ministry,  as  they  go  in  and  out  of  office  with 
changes  of  party,  but  they  are  generally  not  members 
of  the  Cabinet,  as  they  take  no  part  in  the  directing 
councils  of  the  party  leaders.  In  Mr.  Asquith's 
Ministry,  however,  the  Attorney- General  was  a 
member  of  the  Cabinet. 

The  duties  of  the  Attorney-General  are  much  the 
same  as  those  of  the  official  of  the  same  title  in  the 
United  States  Government;  but  he  has  not  such  a 


156  The  Executive 

large  degree  of  direction  and  discretion  in  these 
matters,  and  in  general  his  responsibility  may  be 
said  to  be  less  extensive.  He  and  the  Solicitor- 
General  prosecute  a  few  important  cases,  give  legal 
advice  to  the  Ministry,  and  defend  the  legal  points 
of  the  Ministry's  bills  in  Parliament.1 

The  salaries  of  the  Attorney-General  and  Solicitor- 
General  are  large  and  the  honour  great,  and  from  men 
who  have  held  these  positions  are  filled  the  higher 
judgeships.  Their  positions  are  therefore  worthy 
objects  of  ambition  for  the  highest  class  of  English 
lawyers. 

1  It  is  interesting  to  notice  how  the  officers  derived  from  these 
in  the  United  States  sometimes  bear  the  title  of  the  one  and  some- 
times of  the  other,  as  the  Attorney-General  of  the  nation  or  the 
State,  or  the  Solicitor  of  a  judicial  circuit;  while'in  many  cases  some 
new  title,  as  Prosecuting  Attorney  or  Commonwealth's  Attorney, 
is  substituted. 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE  PERMANENT   CIVIL  SERVICE 

Who  Compose  the  Permanent  Civil  Service.    By 

the  permanent  civil  service  is  meant  those  officials 
or  employees  who  merely  carry  on  the  regular  opera- 
tions of  the  government,  such  as  the  post-office,  etc., 
as  laid  down  by  law,  but  have  nothing  to  do  with 
making  the  laws  or  directing  the  political  policy  of 
the  government.  They  are  permanent,  because 
they  do  not  go  into  or  out  of  office  with  party  victory 
or  defeat,  like  the  Ministers.  They  are  civil  officers 
in  distinction  from  those  who  are  naval  or  military. 
Political  and  Non-Political  Officials.  There  is  in 
England,  says  Professor  Lowell,1  a  "sharp  distinc- 
tion between  political  and  non-political  officials." 
That  is, to  say,  the  men  who  lead  parties  and  shape 
legislation  in  Parliament  are  recognized  and  fol- 
lowed as  political  chiefs  because  through  them  the 
people  can  have  their  will  enacted  into  law;  while 
the  men  who  have  simply  the  faithful  and  competent 

•I.,  US- 

157 


158  The  Executive 

carrying  out  of  existing  law  are  looked  upon  by  the 
people  as  a  business  man  looks  upon  his  clerks — to 
be  retained  or  discharged  because  of  their  possessing 
or  lacking  efficiency  and  honesty.  This  seems  so 
reasonable  that  it  is  surprising  that  it  should  not 
be  universally  recognized  by  all  except  persons  hav- 
ing some  private  interest  to  serve;  and  yet  there  are 
thousands  of  respectable  citizens  in  the  United  States 
today  who  regard  it  as  a  grievance  to  have  their 
letters  handed  to  them  or  delivered  to  their  cor- 
respondents a  thousand  miles  away  by  an  honest, 
capable,  and  courteous  young  man  who  happens  to 
disagree  with  them  on  the  tariff  or  the  future  inde- 
pendence of  the  Philippine  Islands. 

As  in  this  country,  civil  officials  (the  Ministry, 
of  course,  excepted)  are  not  allowed  to  sit  in  Par- 
liament— a  very  useful  rule  for  preventing  the 
executive  from  buying  the  support  of  members  by 
appointments  to  office. 

Civil  Service  Reform  versus  the  Spoils  System. 
By  civil  service  reform  is  meant  making  appoint- 
ments to  government  positions  depend  on  merit 
instead  of  political  favouritism.  The  opposite  prac- 
tice, of  appointing  persons  because  of  their  services 
to  the  successful  party  at  the  last  election,  is  called 
the  " spoils  system/'  because  it  treats  the  public 
offices  as  spoils  of  war  to  be  divided  among  the  poli- 
ticians, instead  of  public  trusts  belonging  to  the 


The  Permanent  Civil  Service       159 

people  and  to  be  administered  for  their  benefit. 
Fortunately  civil  service  reform  has  made  great 
progress  both  in  England  and  the  United  States, 
though,  as  will  be  later  explained,  it  has  been  ex- 
tended much  further  in  the  former. 

Necessity  of  Examinations  in  Selecting  Employees. 
Fitness  for  administrative  office  can  be  discovered 
in  several  ways;  but  the  only  way  that  can  be  used 
on  a  large  scale  in  appointments  to  government 
positions  without  leaving  the  way  open  for  insincere 
politicians  to  evade  the  real  intention  of  the  law  to 
get  the  best  employees  is  a  competitive  examination. 
There  is  no  possibility  of  pretending  that  a  grade  of 
50  assigned  by  an  impartial  board  of  examiners  is 
better  than  a  grade  of  90;  whereas  if  the  law  simply 
directed  the  head  of  a  department  to  appoint  the 
person  whom  investigation  proved  to  be  the  best  for 
the  public  service,  the  politician  could  without  the 
possibility  of  being  conclusively  contradicted  say 
that  the  meanest  corrupt  ward  heeler  in  the  city  met 
those  requirements.  We  can  hardly  hope  to  see 
politics  on  such  a  high  level  that  politicians  would 
voluntarily  appoint  only  the  best  subordinates;  nor 
can  we  hope  to  see  politics  very  pure  in  the  hands  of 
even  the  best  leaders  so  long  as  we  keep  before  them 
the  constant  temptation  to  use  the  offices  as  rewards 
for  their  friends. 

Limitations  on  the  Principle.    There  are  limits 


160  The  Executive 

to  the  usefulness  of  an  examination  for  selecting 
government  appointees.  These  must  be  sensibly 
recognized,  or  else  the  public  will  become  so  impatient 
of  the  absurdities  as  to  throw  over  the  whole  system, 
and  hence  lose  the  benefits  which  it  contains.  The 
highest  positions  cannot  be  filled  in  this  way,  for 
the  reason  that  their  holders  should  possess  in  much 
larger  degree  than  is  necessary  with  others  certain 
qualities,  such  as  judgment,  moderation,  moral 
courage,  common  sense,  wide  experience,  which 
cannot  be  discovered  or  tested  by  a  written  examina- 

S>L 

tion.  But  the  experience  of  England,  as  well  as 
the  light  of  reason,  teaches  that  it  can,  with  the  most 
beneficial  results,  be  applied  to  a  far  greater  number 
of  positions  than  is  done  in  our  country. 

Two  Principles  on  which  Examinations  may  be 
Based.  There  are  two  different  principles  which 
might  be  adopted  by  a  government  in  making  out 
examinations  for  testing  the  fitness  of  applicants  for 
these  administrative  positions.  One  is  to  make  the 
questions  such  as  to  discover  the  preparation  of  the 
person  for  immediately  performing  the  duties  of 
the  particular  position  sought.  This  is  in  general 
the  character  of  the  civil  service  examinations  in  the 
United  States,  though  the  examiners  are  fortunately 
liberating  themselves  to  some  extent  from  this  limi- 
tation. The  other  is  to  ask  such  questions  as  test 
rather  the  natural  ability  and  general  education  of 


The  Permanent  Civil  Service       161 

the  applicant.  This  is  the  principle  forcibly  urged-- v 
by  Lord  Macaulay  at  the  adoption  of  the  examina- 
tion system  in  England,  and  the  one  on  which  their 
examinations  are  based,  except  for  positions  in  which 
a  certain  amount  of  technical  skill  is  necessary  from 
the  first,  as,  e.  g.,  in  the  case  of  machinists.  The 
advantage  of  Lord  Macaulay's  system  as  adopted 
in  England  is  that  it  brings  into  the  government 
service  men  and  women  of  natural  ability  and  broad 
education  who  will  quickly  learn  the  routine  duties 
at  which  they  are  first  placed,  and  who  are  capable 
of  developing  into  valuable  public  servants. 

Excepting  merely  unskilled  labourers,  all  positions 
in  the  English  civil  service  are  awarded  to  candi- 
dates successful  in  the  examinations.  The  appoint- 
ing power  in  England  does  not  have  the  right  to 
choose  between  the  three  highest  contestants,  as  is 
the  rule  under  our  system  with  the  view  of  selecting 
the  applicant  best  suited  by  personal  qualities  for  the 
position  in  question.  Candidates  are  appointed  in 
exact  order  of  the  standing  they  have  earned,  though 
the  tests  include  physical  examination  and  personal 
interviews.  Except  for  merely  clerical  posts,  the  ex- 
aminations are  of  such  a  grade  that  trial  by  any 
except  university  graduates  is  almost  hopeless.  A 
glance  down  the  list  of  appointees  shows  almost  all 
bearing  degrees  from  the  great  universities,  and  most 
with  a  good  number  of  academic  honours.  A  con- 


1 62  The  Executive 

siderable  portion  of  the  best  young  intellect  of  the 
country  goes  each  year  into  the  civil  service,  and  the 
result  is  government  by  gentlemen,  but  a  corps  of 
gentlemen  who  are  highly  educated  and  rigorously 
selected  professional  administrators.  Whether  it  is 
democratic  or  undemocratic  depends  entirely  upon 
your  definition  of  democracy. 

No  "  Political  Pull."  Political  influence  has  thus 
been  so  thoroughly  eliminated  in  securing  office  or 
promotion  that  the  attempt  to  use  it  is  treated  "as 
an  admission  on  the  part  of  such  officer  that  his  case 
is  not  good  upon  its  merits."1  All  postmasters  and 
revenue  officers,  all  clerks  in  government  depart- 
ments, obtain  and  hold  their  positions  by  merit 
alone.  A  member  of  Parliament  would  no  more 
think  of  trying  to  have  the  postmaster  discharged 
because  he  belonged  to  the  defeated  party  than 
because  he  was  a  member  of  a  different  church. 

Forces  Favouring  Civil  Service  Reform  in  Eng- 
land. It  was  far  easier  for  the  friends  of  good  govern- 
ment in  England  to  secure  the  adoption  of  the  merit 
system  of  appointments  and  promotions  to  office  than 
in  the  United  States,  for  three  reasons.  First,Jthe 
English  have  a  deep  respect  for  what  is  called  "vested 
right,"  i.  e.  a  person's  right  to  whatever  he  has  held 
for  a  long  time. 2  Second,  the  parliamentary  system 

1  Lowell,  i.,  170-1,  quoting  from  the  Admiralty  Office. 
» /&.,  i.t  153-4. 


The  Permanent  Civil  Service       163 

of  government  offers  little  opportunity  to  members 
of  Parliament  to  demand  offices  for  their  supporters 
under  the  threat  of  voting  against  the  party  leaders  ; 
for  the  voters  choose  their  representative  primarily 
to  support  the  Ministry  of  which  they  approve  and 
would  not  tolerate  disloyalty  to  this  trust  in  order 
that  a  politician  might  pay  political  debts  to  other 
smaller  politicians  in  which  the  general  public  has 
no  interest. x  And  third,  the  political  life  of  England, 
from  being  a  hundred  years  ago  very  corrupt,  has 
come  to  be  perhaps  the  freest  from  the  grosser  forms 
of  corruption  of  any  great  popular  government  in 
the  world.2 

Civil  Service  Pensions.  Public  servants  who  have 
served  for  ten  years  may  retire  on  a  small  pension 
on  becoming  sixty  years  of  age  or  on  becoming  physi- 
cally incapable  of  work.  The  employees  cannot  be 
expected  to  exhibit  fidelity  and  efficiency  unless  they 
are  assured  of  the  tenure  of  their  positions  so  long 
as  they  do  manifest  these  qualities,  and  the  neces- 
sary familiarity  and  skill  in  their  duties  cannot  be 
attained  without  long  service.  But  the  salaries  are 
too  low  to  admit  of  much  saving,  and  hence  some 
system  of  civil  service  pensions  is  a  necessity  for  the 
successful  and  efficient  operation  of  the  administra- 
tive machinery  of  the  government. 

1  Lowell,  171-2. 

aOn  the  insidious  influence  of  money  through  the  practice  of 
"nursing"  a  constituency,  see  below,  page  218. 


PART  m 

THE  JUDICIARY 

CHAPTER  XVI 

THE  CRIMINAL  COURTS 

Complicated  System.  Though  the  English  system 
of  courts  has  been  greatly  simplified  of  recent  years, 
the  fact  that  it  grew  by  irregular  additions  through 
many  centuries  renders  it  still  quite  complicated. 
Probably  the  best  method  of  making  it  clear  will 
be  to  take  up  first  the  administration  of  criminal 
justice,  trace  that  from  the  lowest  to  the  highest 
court ;  then  do  the  same  with  the  courts  dealing  with 
civil  cases;  and  lastly,  give  a  view  of  the  judicial 
system  as  a  whole. 

The  Justices  of  the  Peace.  The  lowest  judicial 
officials  in  England  are  the  justices  of  the  peace. 
There  are  many  of  these  in  every  county,  drawn 
usually  from  the  landed  gentry  in  the  country  and 
the  successful  men  of  business  in  the  cities,  and 
serving  without  any  pay.1  They  are  generally  not 

1  For  the  appointment  and  tenure  of  all  judges,  see  page  203. 

164 


The  Criminal  Courts  165 

educated  as  lawyers,  though  they  of  course  acquire 
considerable  knowledge  by  practice. 

Clerk  of  Petty  Sessions.  This  lack  of  technical 
knowledge  is  met  by  the  requirement  that  they  shall 
choose  as  a  recording  officer  and  adviser  a  person 
who  is  not  only  qualified  as  an  efficient  secretary, 
but  is  also  a  lawyer  of  long  training  and  practice. 
This  official,  known  as  the  Clerk  of  Petty  Sessions, 
advises  the  justices  on  all  points  of  law,  both  in 
conducting  cases  and  in  rendering  their  decisions, 
while  they  contribute  their  common  sense,  experience 
in  affairs,  and  judgment  on  matters  of  fact. 

Powers  of  a  Single  Justice.  The  powers  that  a 
single  justice  may  exercise  may  be  summed  up  as 
three:  first,  issuing  warrants  of  arrest;  second,  try- 
ing without  a  jury  trivial  offences,  and  third,  binding 
over  for  trial  at  a  higher  court  and  granting  bail  to 
persons  whose  offences  exceed  his  jurisdiction. 

The  first  and  third  items  require  no  explanation. 
In  regard  to  the  second,  in  the  pettiest  offences  the 
single  justice  may  try  the  case  without  a  jury. 
There  are  also  many  other  petty  offences  which  he 
may  either  dispose  of  in  the  same  way  or  send  up  to 
a  higher  court ;  but  he  cannot  in  these  cases  impose 
fine  or  imprisonment  exceeding  twenty  shillings  or 
fourteen  days,  even  though  the  higher  court  might 
inflict  a  heavier  penalty. T 

1  Alexander,  57. 


1 66  The  Judiciary 

The  Petty  Sessions.  Misdemeanours '  above  those 
of  ordinary  police  court  jurisdiction  are  tried  by 
two  or  more  justices  sitting  as  a  Court  of  Petty 
Sessions  in  regularly  designated  places  known  as 
petty  sessions  court-houses.  These  are  dotted  over 
the  county  so  as  to  bring  justice  near  to  every  man's 
door.  The  two  or  more  justices  present  judge  both 
law  and  facts  without  a  jury.  The  accused,  if  con- 
victed, has  the  right  of  appeal  for  a  complete  new 
trial  to  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions,2  or  with  cer- 
tain restrictions  of  an  appeal  on  points  of  law  to  the 
High  Court  of  Justice  in  London.3 

Summary  Jurisdiction.  The  trial  of  an  offender 
by  Petty  Sessions  is  known  as  summary  jurisdiction ; 
i.  e.  it  is  prompt,  quick,  and  cheap;  and  in  fact  it 
disposes  of  the  vast  mass  of  lesser  misdemeanours 
above  petty  police  court  cases.  The  accused  cannot 
demand  to  be  tried  summarily;  for  if  the  justices 
think  his  offence  sufficiently  serious,  even  though 
they  have  the  right  to  try  it,  they  will  bind  him  over 
to  the  Quarter  Sessions  or  the  Assizes.4  Nor  can 
summary  trial  be  forced  upon  the  accused;  for  the 

x  Crimes  are  divided  into  misdemeanours  (i.  e.  minor  offences), 
and  "high  crimes,"  or  felonies  (i.  e.  serious  criminal  acts).     Viola- 
tions of  city  ordinances  are  not  ordinarily  spoken  of  as  crimes. 
.  a  For  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  see  page  167. 

3  Lowell,  ii.f  454.      For  the  High  Court  of  Justice,  see  page  176 
below. 

4  For  definition  of  Quarter  Sessions  and  Assizes,  see  pages  167 
and  176. 


The  Criminal  Courts  167 

justices  must  explain  to  him  his  right  to  be  tried  by 
jury  in  the  Quarter  Sessions  or  the  Assizes,  inform- 
ing him  that  he  will  be  immediately  tried  by  them- 
selves summarily  if  he  does  not  choose  now  to  claim 
the  right  of  trial  by  jury  before  the  higher  court. 

The  court  of  summary  jurisdiction  (i.  e.  the  Petty 
Sessions)  can  impose  no  heavier  punishment  than 
three  months'  imprisonment  or  a  fine  of  £20,  though 
a  higher  court  trying  the  same  case  with  a  jury 
might  inflict  a  severer  sentence.  * 

Quarter  Sessions.  Next  above  the  Court  of  Petty 
Sessions  stands  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions.2 
This  consists  of  all  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  the 
county,  or  so  many  of  them  as  attend,  at  least  two 
being  necessary.  Yorkshire  and  Lincolnshire  are 
each  divided  into  three  parts  for  the  purpose  of  the 
Quarter  Sessions,  the  justices  and  courts  of  each 
division  being  as  separate  from  the  others  as  those 
of  any  two  counties.  Many  large  cities  enjoy  the 
privileges  of  a  county3  and  have  their  own  Court  of 
Quarter  Sessions.  In  fact  any  city  incorporated  as 


1  The  Petty  Sessions  may,  with  the  consent  of  the  parent,  try 
summarily  any  case  against  a  child,  except  homicide;  but  a  con- 
victed child  under  fourteen  years  of  age  cannot  under  any  circum- 
stances be  sentenced  to  imprisonment  by  any  court,  but  must  be 
placed  in  a  reformatory  or  otherwise  dealt  with  as  its  interests  seem 
to  require. 

3  Or  General  Quarter  Sessions,  whence  the  custom  in  some  Ameri- 
can States  of  calling  the  principal  criminal  court  the  Court  of  General 
Sessions.  a  See  page  230. 


1 68  The  Judiciary 

a  borough  may  have  this  arrangement.  Thus  we 
have  County  Quarter  Sessions  and  Borough  Quarter 
Sessions ;  but  in  the  latter  there  is  a  paid  professional 
judge  who  conducts  the  court  as  its  sole  judge,  like 
a  judge  with  his  jury  in  an  ordinary  criminal  court 
in  America. 

In  the  Quarter  Sessions  all  questions  for  the  deci- 
sion of  the  bench  are  settled  by  a  majority  vote  of 
the  justices  participating. 

If  business  is  heavy,  the  justices  may  divide  into 
groups,  each  group  conducting  business  as  a  complete 
court. 

The  Clerk  of  the  Peace.  Though,  as  stated  on 
page  165,  the  justices  do  not  generally  possess  legal 
training,  yet  it  is  a  fact  that  the  one  of  their  number 
whom  they  choose  to  act  as  their  permanent  chair- 
man of  Quarter  Sessions  is  usually  a  lawyer. x  None 
the  less,  the  entire  bench  of  justices  for  the  county, 
like  the  smaller  groups  in  the  various  sections  of  the 
county  with  their  Clerk  of  Petty  Sessions,  are  re- 
quired to  elect  as  their  clerk  and  legal  guide  a  lawyer 
of  long  standing.  This  official  is  known  as  the  Clerk 
of  the  Peace.  Like  the  similar  officer  in  the  Petty 
Sessions,2  the  Clerk  of  the  Peace  gives  the  justices 
all  necessary  assistance  during  the  course  of  the  trial, 
and  after  the  hearing  of  evidence  and  argument, 
advises  them  of  the  law  in  the  case.  It  is,  as  de- 

1  Porritt,  ill.  "See  pages  165-6. 


The  Criminal  Courts  169 

scribed  above,  a  method  of  combining  technical 
training  with  the  freer  non-professional  outlook. 

Jurisdiction  of  the  Quarter  Sessions.  Besides  a 
limited  class  of  civil  business,  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Quarter  Sessions  includes  all  criminal  cases  except, 
first,  mere  police  court  offences,  and  second,  a  few 
cases  which  are  of  the  most  serious  character  or 
which  involve  difficult  questions  of  law.  This  court 
is,  in  fact,  the  great  clearing  house  for  criminal  justice, 
as  much  the  larger  portion  of  all  indictable  offences1 
in  the  kingdom  are  tried  in  the  Quarter  Sessions  of 
the  counties  and  boroughs. 

Original,  Appellate,  and  Concurrent  Jurisdiction. 
In  order  to  understand  some  functions  of  the  courts 
which  will  presently  appear,  it  is  necessary  at  this 
point  to  define  the  terms  which  stand  at  the  head  of 
this  paragraph.  The  original  jurisdiction  of  a  court 
means  its  right  to  try  a  case  in  the  first  instance. 
E.  g.,  a  single  justice  has  original  jurisdiction  in 
petty  police  court  offences,  such  as  simple  disorderly 
conduct. 

By  appellate  jurisdiction  is  meant  the  right  of  a 
court  to  try  a  case  over  again  on  appeal  from  a  lower 
court  in  which  it  has  already  been  tried.  E.  g., 
the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  may  in  many  instances 
re-try  on  appeal  the  case  of  a  person  who  has  been 

1  Indictable  offences  include  all  above  the  jurisdiction  of  a  mere 
police  court.  For  fuller  account  of  the  indictment,  see  pages  174-5. 


170  The  Judiciary 

convicted  in  the  Court  of  Petty  Sessions,  and  may 
either  confirm  or  reverse  the  verdict  first  given. 

By  concurrent  jurisdiction  is  meant  the  right  of 
either  of  two  courts  to  try  a  case.  E.  g.,  except  in  a 
few  cases,  either  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  or  the 
Court  of  Assize  (the  court  next  above  the  Quarter 
Sessions)  can  try  in  the  first  instance  any  of  the 
offences  which  come  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Quarter  Sessions.  That  is,  the  proper  official  may 
send  the  accused  before  either  court,  choosing  the 
one  which  meets  first  or  in  which  he  believes  stricter 
justice  will  be  administered. 

Appellate  Jurisdiction  of  the  Quarter  Sessions. 
The  appellate  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Quarter 
Sessions  extends  both  to  law  and  fact.  That  is,  it 
may  on  re-trial  reverse  the  decision  of  the  Court  of 
Petty  Sessions,  either  because  the  latter  court  de- 
cided wrongly  as  to  the  facts  as  shown  by  the  evi- 
dence, or  because  it  misinterpreted  and  misapplied 
the  law  governing  the  case.  Also,  new  evidence 
may  be  heard  on  the  appeal.  In  brief,  the  appeal  to 
the  Quarter  Sessions  secures  an  entirely  new  trial, 
the  same  as  if  the  case  had  been  originally  begun  in 
that  court.  But  it  is  to  be  noted  that,  though  the 
Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  tries  all  criminal  cases  in 
the  first  instance  by  a  jury,  in  trying  a  case  on  appeal 
it  uses  no  jury.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  the 
Clerk  of  the  Peace,  solving  legal  difficulties  as  they 


The  Criminal  Courts  171 

arise  and  at  the  conclusion  of  the  evidence  and  argu- 
ment explaining  the  law  bearing  on  the  case,  is  in 
effect  a  judge  in  the  American  sense,  and  that  the 
justices  are  virtually  a  standing  jury  of  more  than 
usual  intelligence,  training,  and  authority. 

What  Cases  May  be  Appealed.  The  law  govern- 
ing the  right  of  appeal  from  the  lowest  court  to  the 
Quarter  Sessions  is  too  complicated  to  attempt  here 
more  than  the  following  rough  summary: 

Cases  of  petty  police  court  character  may  be  ap- 
pealed from  a  single  justice  to  the  Quarter  Sessions 
if  the  convicted  person  has  been  sentenced  to  im- 
prisonment without  the  alternative  of  a  fine ; 

Cases  in  which  the  punishment  exceeds  a  certain 
limit  may  be  appealed  from  the  single  justice ; 

Cases  of  conviction  before  a  single  justice  may 
often  be  appealed  although  an  appeal  could  not  be 
made  if  the  accused  had  been  convicted  of  the  same 
offence  before  two  or  more  justices. 

Many  cases  may  be  appealed  from  the  Petty  Ses- 
sions for  a  new  trial  before  the  Quarter  Sessions. 

A  serious  defect  in  the  scrupulous  fairness  which 
as  a  rule  permeates  British  justice  is  the  expense 
attending  an  unsuccessful  appeal  from  the  single 
justice  or  the  Petty  Sessions  to  the  Quarter  Sessions ; 
for  the  appellant  must  enter  into  bond  in  a  sum 
of  £20  or  more  to  stand  the  costs  of  the  appeal  if 
unsuccessful.  This  amounts  to  nothing  less  than 


i72  The  Judiciary 

practically  denying  to  the  poor  the  right  of  appeal 
and  without  doubt  causes  much  injustice. 

Besides  the  appeal  to  the  Quarter  Sessions  for  a 
rertrial  before  that  court,  there  is  allowed  with 
certain  limitations  an  appeal  from  a  single  justice, 
Petty  Sessions,  or  Quarter  Sessions  on  a  point  of 
law  to  the  High  Court  of  Justice. x 

Different  Functions  of  the  Judge  and  the  Jury. 
It  is  well  to  explain  at  this  point  the  difference  in 
function  of  the  judge  and  the  jury.  The  judge's 
duty  is  to  know  and  apply  the  law  to  the  case  in 
question.  He  is  not  to  decide  upon  the  facts.  That 
is  the  prerogative  in  a  free  country  of  the  jury  of  the 
fellow-citizens  of  the  person  on  trial  in  a  criminal 
case  or  of  the  parties  to  the  controversy  in  a  civil 
case.  The  citizen  is  thus  protected  from  having  his 
life,  liberty,  or  property  imperilled  by  the  say-so  of 
a  government  official,  but  rests  in  the  security  of  the 
judgment  of  his  peers  and  fellow-citizens,  men  who 
hold  no  public  place,  have  no  professional  impulse 
to  vindicate  their  official  position  or  to  enforce  mere 
authority  as  distinct  from  justice  and  the  public 
good.  While  it  is  true  that  the  trained  and  practised 
mind  of  an  educated  judge  is  far  better  fitted  to 
decide  a  matter  of  pure  logic  or  intellect,  it  is  also 
true  that  a  judge  almost  inevitably  comes  to  imbibe 
such  a  preconception  in  favour  of  law  and  the  su- 

1  For  the  High  Court  of  Justice,  see  page  176. 


The  Criminal  Courts  173 

premacy  of  the  state  that  he  would  in  many  cases 
be  unfavourably  biassed  against  the  accused.  Con- 
sequently the  jury,  though  not  so  well  trained  or  of 
such  natural  intelligence  as  the  judge,  is  a  safer 
guardian  of  the  liberty  of  the  citizen.  The  jury,  if 
properly  guarded  against  the  admission  of  ignorant 
or  corrupt  men,  is  pretty  sure  to  be  capable  of  saying 
which  of  two  sides  has  made  the  better  showing  in 
the  mere  facts  of  the  case. 

But  however  intelligent  a  jury  might  be,  it  cannot 
be  expected  to  know  the  rules  and  enactments  of  the 
vast  body  of  law  which  has  been  built  up  through 
centuries.  It  is  therefore  necessary  that  the  judge 
shall  state  and  explain  to  them  the  law  bearing  upon 
the  particular  case  before  them,  in  order  that  they 
may  intelligently  render  their  verdict  on  the  facts 
in  the  light  of  the  legal  rights  and  obligations  of  all 
concerned. 

Right  to  Trial  by  Jury.  We  may  here  summarize 
the  part  played  by  the  jury  in  the  criminal  courts. 
The  single  justice  and  the  Court  of  Petty  Sessions 
in  trying  the  petty  cases  which  fall  within  their 
jurisdiction  employ  no  jury.  In  the  Court  of  Quar- 
ter Sessions  the  accused  is  always  tried  by  jury, 
except  on  appeal  from  the  lower  court,  in  which  case 
the  justices  judge  both  law  and  fact.  We  may  state 
here  also  that  the  Court  of  Assize1 — the  court  for 

1  See  page  176. 


174  The  Judiciary 

serious  crimes — always  employs  a  jury,  as  does  also 
the  King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice, x  when  trying  a  person  by  original  jurisdic- 
tion. 

Grand  Jury  and  Petty  Jury.  Since  practically 
everyone  is  in  a  general  way  familiar  with  the  trial 
of  a  case  by  jury,  we  have  so  far  assumed  that  the 
word  jury  referred  to  a  trial  jury.  The  jury  which 
hears  a  criminal  case  and  declares  the  accused  guilty 
or  not  guilty  is  called  the  petty  jury,  or  trial  jury. 
In  England  it  consists  of  twelve  men  chosen  from 
those  who  possess  a  certain  low  property  qualifi- 
cation, namely  owning  or  occupying  land  of  an  an- 
nual rental  value  of  £io.2  Their  verdict  must  be 
unanimous. 

Before  any  one  can  be  put  to  the  humiliation  and 
expense  of  a  trial  for  a  serious  offence,  he  must  be 
indicted  by  the  grand  jury.  The  grand  jury  is 
drawn  from  citizens  of  a  considerably  higher  property 
qualification  and  consists  of  not  less  than  twelve 
nor  more  than  twenty-three  members.  They  ex- 
amine the  broad  general  facts  of  the  case  as  brought 
to  their  attention  by  a  private  citizen,  the  public 
prosecutor,  or  their  own  investigation.  If  the  charge 
is  evidently  frivolous  they  say  "no  true  bill,"  and 
the  accused  is  dismissed.  If,  however,  there  appears 

1  See  pages  177  and  179. 

a  With  certain  other  qualifications  for  non-landowners. 


The  Criminal  Courts  175 

sufficient  evidence  to  warrant  a  trial,  they  say  "true 
bill,"  and  the  case  is  given  to  the  petty  jury  for  trial. 
For  this  at  least  twelve  of  the  twenty-three  members 
of  the  grand  jury  must  agree. 

The  Indictment.  A  "true  bill"  is  also  called  an 
indictment.  The  accused  can  be  tried  only  for  the 
crime  specifically  charged  in  the  indictment.  The 
purpose  of  the  grand  jury  and  the  indictment  is  thus 
to  prevent  vexatious  and  unjust  affliction  to  innocent 
persons  through  prosecution  arising  from  lack  of 
judgment  or  personal  spite,  and  also  to  enable  the 
accused  to  know  exactly  the  nature  of  the  charge 
against  which  he  must  be  prepared  to  defend  himself. 

Even  though  the  grand  jury  may  find  "no  true 
bill,"  a  "true  bill"  may  later  be  found  by  another 
grand  jury  on  the  same  accusation.  But  when  a 
person  is  once  acquitted  by  a  petty  jury,  he  can 
never  be  tried  again  for  that  offence,  even  if  it  should 
be  proved  that  he  was  acquitted  by  false  testimony 
or  if  new  evidence  conclusively  establishing  his  guilt 
should  be  discovered.  Though  a  person  richly 
deserving  punishment  may  at  times  escape  in  this 
way,  it  is  a  proper  provision;  for  one  must  be  able 
to  know  that  he  is  free  from  the  peril  of  trial  after 
trial,  after,  perhaps,  the  witnesses  who  could  estab- 
lish his  innocence  are  dead.  "It  is  better  for  ten 
guilty  men  to  escape  rather  than  for  one  innocent 
person  to  perish." 


176  The  Judiciary 

There  is  no  grand  jury  or  indictment  in  the  small 
cases  tried  without  a  petty  jury. 

Assize  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice.  Next  above 
the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  stands  the  Court  of 
Assize,  or  the  Assize  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice. 
This  august  tribunal,  with  which  lie  the  issues  of 
life  and  death,  of  liberty  or  life  imprisonment,  and 
the  weightier  matters  of  the  civil  law,  presents  the 
most  imposing  aspect  of  English  justice  outside  the 
highest  courts  in  London.  The  judge's  entrance  to 
the  court-house  is  marked  with  solemn  ceremony. 
His  head  is  covered  with  a  great  wig  that  adds  dignity 
to  his  appearance;  while  administering  civil  justice 
he  wears  a  black  silk  gown,  and  when  he  takes  up 
criminal  business  the  change  is  impressively  an- 
nounced by  his  being  clothed  in  a  robe  of  crim- 
son. When  he  performs  the  solemn  duty  of 
passing  sentence  of  death,  he  removes  his  wig  and 
places  upon  his  head  a  black  cap  worn  only  for  this 
occasion. 

The  organization  and  relationships  of  this  court 
are  so  complex  that  we  shall  explain  them  at  this 
point  only  so  far  as  is  necessary  for  the  purposes  of 
this  chapter. 

The  High  Court  of  Justice.  In  London  there  is 
a  body  of  twenty-five  judges  having  authority  over 
the  whole  country,  and  called  "the  High  Court  of 
Justice."  There  are  three  divisions  of  this  court, 


The  Criminal  Courts  177 

for  trying  different  kinds  of  cases.1  The  one  which 
concerns  us  now  is  the  King's  Bench  Division  of  the 
High  Court  of  Justice,  or,  for  short,  the  King's  Bench 
Division.  This  consists  of  sixteen  judges  chosen 
from  among  the  eminent  lawyers  of  the  country. 
The  judges  of  the  King's  Bench  Division  are  the  ones 
who  are  sent  out  from  London  to  hold  the  Assizes 
of  the  High  Court  of  Justice. 2 

Circuits.  For  holding  the  Assizes,  England  (in- 
cluding Wales)  is  divided  into  eight  circuits,  each 
containing  several  counties.  One  or  two  of  the 
judges  of  the  King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High 
Court  of  Justice  are  assigned  to  each  circuit,  to  visit 
either  singly  or  together  their  circuit  four  times  a 
year.  In  case  they  go  together,  one  holds  criminal 
while  the  other  holds  civil  court.  The  court  is  held 
in  at  least  one  place  in  each  county;  but  several  of 
the  larger  counties  are  cut  up  for  this  purpose  into 
two  or  three  divisions,  each  of  which  is  treated  as  a 
separate  county.  This  system  of  circuit  courts 

1  Any  judge  may  sit  on  any  kind  of  case,  and  any  of  the  three 
divisions  of  the  court  may  apply  either  common  law  or  equity. 

2  The  Central  Criminal  Court.     Not  to  break  the  systematic  de- 
scription of  the  courts  of  the  text,  an  account  of  the  Central  Crimi- 
nal Court  is  inserted  here.     This  court  serves  as  a  Court  of  Quarter 
Sessions  for  the  City  of  London  proper  and  as  a  Court  of  Assize  for 
the  metropolitan  district.     It  meets  monthly  and  is  presided  over 
by  judges  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice  or  certain  judges  of  the 
City  of  London.     It  sits  usually  in  three,  or  if  pressure  of  business 
demands,  in  four  or  even  five  divisions,  each  in  effect  a  separate 
court. 

12 


178  The  Judiciary 

presided  over  by  royal  judges  sent  out  from  London 
was  organized  in  the  twelfth  century  by  Henry  II 
and  stands  as  one  of  its  founder's  surest  titles  to 
statesmanship.  By  means  of  it  uniform  laws  and 
justice  were  made  possible  throughout  the  realm  and 
England  was  put  centuries  ahead  of  the  countries 
of  the  continent  in  nationality,  union,  and  legal 
development. 

Jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Assize.  The  Assize 
of  the  High  Court  of  Justice  can  try  any  indictable 
offence,  i.  e.  any  crime  above  the  petty  misdemean- 
ours which  are  reserved  for  the  lowest  courts,  or  to 
put  it  more  exactly,  any  case  for  the  trial  of  which 
the  finding  of  a  "  true  bill "  by  the  grand  jury  is  neces- 
sary. Cases  involving  the  death  penalty  or  life 
imprisonment  or  difficult  points  of  law  are  reserved 
for  the  Assize  alone,  but  less  serious  indictment 
cases  may  be  tried  either  in  it  or  the  Court  of  Quar- 
ter Sessions.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Quarter 
Sessions  dispose  of  most  of  the  latter,  and  the  Assizes 
are  occupied  mainly  with  the  graver  cases. 

Relations  of  Assizes  to  Other  Courts.  Though 
the  judge  who  goes  out  to  hold  the  Assizes  is  a  mem- 
ber of  the  King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court 
of  Justice,  he  is  not,  on  Assize,  holding  the  Court  of 
King's  Bench, I  nor  is  he  performing  that  duty  under 
the  control,  supervision,  or  appellate  jurisdiction  of 

1  There  is  in  fact  now  no  Court  of  King's  Bench. 


The  Criminal  Courts  179 

the  King's  Bench  Division.  He  is,  on  the  contrary, 
holding  the  Assize,  or  local  meeting,  of  the  High 
Court  of  Justice,  the  great  national  court  of  which 
the  King's  Bench  Division  is  only  one  part.  The 
Assize  is  indeed  co-ordinate  with  the  King's  Bench 
Division,1  and  appeals  lie  from  either  of  them  to 
their  common  superiors,  the  Court  of  Appeal  in 
civil  cases  and  to  the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal  in 
criminal  cases. 

Though  the  Assizes  are  superior  in  grade  to  the 
Courts  of  Petty  and  Quarter  Sessions,  yet  they  have 
no  appellate  jurisdiction  over  those  courts,  appeals 
from  which  go  straight  to  London  to  the  King's 
Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice  or  the 
Court  of  Appeal  or  the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal, 
according  to  the  nature  of  the  case.2 

The  Original  and  Appellate  Jurisdiction  of  the 
King's  Bench  Division.  The  King's  Bench  Division 
of  the  High  Court  of  Justice,  though  not  superior 
in  jurisdiction  to  the  Court  of  Assize,  is  superior  in 
learning  and  dignity,  as  it  comprises  all  the  judges 
who  separately  hold  the  Assizes.  It  is  provided, 
therefore,  that  certain  cases  of  exceptional  impor- 
tance may  be,  at  the  desire  of  the  government,  tried 
before  the  King's  Bench  Division.  Such  cases  are 
comparatively  few. 

x  Alexander,  118. 

3  The  functions  and  relations  of  the  Court  of  Appeal  and  the  Court 
of  Criminal  Appeal  are  explained  on  pages  180-82,  and  199-200. 


i8o  The  Judiciary 

The  King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice  acts  as  a  court  of  appeal  for  errors  in  law  by 
the  courts  of  Petty  and  Quarter  Sessions,  and  as 
such  it  has  extensive  duties. 

The  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal.  In  1907,  Parlia- 
ment established  a  court  for  hearing  appeals  from 
the  Courts  of  Quarter  Sessions  and  Assize,  a  right 
which  had  previously  existed  in  such  a  limited  degree 
as  to  lead  to  the  statement  generally  made  that  there 
was  no  right  of  appeal  in  criminal  cases.  The  state- 
ment in  that  extreme  form  is  inaccurate;  for  even 
before  1907  there  was  the  right  of  appeal  on  account 
of  an  unmistakable  error  in  the  record,  and  Petty 
and  Quarter  Sessions  could  be  restrained  from  com- 
mitting wrong  or  compelled  to  perform  a  manifest 
duty  by  an  order  obtained  from  a  superior  court. 
Moreover  the  presiding  judge  in  these  courts  could 
of  his  own  will  refer  a  point  of  law  for  decision  to  the 
higher  court.  All  this  was  inadequate,  however, 
and  permitted  many  a  wrong  for  which  no  remedy 
whatever  existed.  It  was  the  occurrence  of  a  pecu- 
liarly outrageous  miscarriage  of  justice  from  the  want 
of  a  proper  system  of  appeals  that  led  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal. 

This  court  may  hear  appeals  in  any  indictable 
offence,  i.  e.  any  crime  above  mere  police  court 
offences,  which  is  the  same  as  to  say  in  any  case  in 
which  there  has  been  found  a  true  bill  by  a  grand 


The  Criminal  Courts  181 

jury.  Its  duties  are  of  course  mainly  to  deal  with 
cases  of  a  serious  nature.  The  Court  of  Criminal 
Appeal  consists  of  three  or  more  judges  uneven  in 
number  chosen  by  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  (the  head 
of  the  King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice)  from  the  King's  Bench  Division  for  that 
purpose.  It  hears  its  cases,  of  course,  without  a 
jury. 

The  appeal  to  this  court  may  be  on  account  of 
any  one  of  a  number  of  reasons,  or  on  account  of 
several  reasons  taken  together.  First,  the  con- 
victed person  may  ask  the  court  to  reverse  the  con- 
viction because  the  verdict  was  not  sustained  by 
the  facts.  Second,  he  may  appeal  on  a  point  of 
law ;  i.  e.  he  may  ask  to  be  set  free  because  the  judge 
in  the  lower  court  either  committed  or  permitted 
some  error  which  caused  him  to  be  convicted  unjustly. 
Third,  he  may  appeal  to  have  his  sentence  reduced, 
unless  its  amount  is  fixed  by  law  without  discretion 
on  the  judge's  part.1 

In  no  case  can  the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal 
order  a  new  trial.  It  disposes  finally  of  the  case  by 
either  confirming,  reversing,  reducing,  or  increasing 
the  sentence  of  the  lower  court.  In  most  cases  this 
is  eminently  proper  and  contributes  greatly  to  the 
promptness  and  certainty  of  justice — qualities  so 

1  On  points  of  law  the  right  to  appeal  is  absolute;  on  other  points 
leave  must  be  granted  by  the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal  or  the 
court  from  which  appeal  is  made. 


The  Judiciary 

seriously  impaired  in  this  country  by  undue  pro- 
longation through  appeal,  remanding  to  the  lower 
court  for  re-trial,  and  again  appeal,  and  so  forth 
until  years  are  consumed  and  justice  dies,  so  to 
speak,  of  suspended  animation.  There  arise  cases, 
however,  in  which  an  entire  re-trial  before  a  jury 
is  needed,  and  the  judges  of  the  English  Court  of 
Criminal  Appeal  have  expressed  their  regret  that 
it  is  not  possible  for  them  at  times  to  order  this. 

No  appeal  can  be  taken  from  the  decision  of  the 
Court  of  Criminal  Appeal  unless  the  Attorney -General 
certifies  that  the  case  involves  points  of  exceptional 
public  importance.  In  that  event,  appeal  lies  from 
the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal  to  the  House  of  Lords, 
the  ancient  supreme  court  of  England. 

The  Lords  of  Appeal  in  Ordinary.  In  remote 
times,  when  laws  were  few  and  simple,  the  House  of 
Lords  could  perform  the  duty  of  a  supreme  court 
acceptably;  but  now  none  can  do  so  except  trained 
lawyers.  For  this  purpose  there  are  four  eminent 
lawyers  appointed  lords  for  life  (i.  e.  they  do  not 
transmit  their  titles  to  their  sons)  to  discharge  this 
duty  for  the  Lords.  They  are  called  Lords  of 
Appeal  in  Ordinary,  or  law  lords,  and  together  with 
the  Lord  Chancellor  and  any  other  lords  who  may 
have  held  high  judicial  office  whom  they  choose  to 
invite,  they  constitute  in  effect  the  supreme  court  of 
Great  Britain.  Though  any  member  of  the  House 


The  Criminal  Courts  183 

of  Lords  has  the  legal  right  to  attend  and  vote  on 
appeals,  a  custom  as  strong  as  law  forbids;  and 
should  any  lord  attempt  such  conduct  it  would 
promptly  be  made  impossible  in  future  by  an  appro- 
priate statute. 

Prosecution  of  Offenders.  Prosecutions  are  con- 
ducted in  England  with  less  system  than  in  other 
countries.  The  Attorney-General,  or  his  assistant 
and  substitute  the  Solicitor-General,  conducts  the 
prosecution  of  a  few  cases  of  national  importance. 
There  is  also  an  official  called  the  Director  of  Public 
Prosecutions,  with  several  assistants,  who  is  obliged 
to  prosecute  in  all  capital  offences,  in  those  of  great 
public  importance,  and  in  a  few  others.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  these  amount  to  only  a  few  hundred  cases 
annually  for  the  whole  country. 

The  vast  bulk  of  cases  are  still  prosecuted,  in 
theory,  by  private  persons,  usually  those  having 
suffered  the  wrong;  but  the  expense  is  now  borne  by 
the  county.  The  prosecution  is  conducted  by  a 
lawyer  employed  for  the  purpose,  as  there  is  no  regu- 
lar prosecuting  attorney  for  ordinary  cases  as  in  the 
United  States.1 

The  Power  of  the  Judge.  An  English  judge  not 
only  states  and  explains  the  law  to  the  jury  and  sees 
that  the  whole  trial  is  conducted  legally,  but  also 
in  his  address,  or  charge,  to  the  jury  immediately 

'Alexander,  127-35;  Lowell,  i.,  133-4;  Porritt,  109,  ™5> 


1 84  The  Judiciary 

before  their  entering  into  consultation,  he  sums  up 
and  comments  upon  the  evidence  on  both  sides. 
This  practice  regarding  the  evidence  is  still  allowed 
in  some  American  States,  while  in  others  the  judge 
is  confined  to  explaining  and  applying  the  law. 
While  it  allows  an  unfair  judge  a  dangerous  oppor- 
tunity, it  doubtless  on  the  whole  is  of  assistance  to 
the  jury  in  administering  justice  to  have  the  services 
of  a  trained  lawyer  who  is  interested  in  neither  side 
call  to  their  attention  the  essential  and  unessential, 
the  important  and  the  negligible  features  of  the 
evidence,  and  thus  concentrate  their  minds  upon  the 
points  in  the  proper  consideration  of  which  a  correct 
decision  rests. 

Promptness  of  English  Courts.  Justice  in  Eng- 
land is  swift  and  sure.  While  there  is  no  hurry, 
there  is  also  no  useless  delay.  It  is  unusual  for  more 
than  three  months,  says  Porritt,  to  elapse  between 
the  arrest  of  a  guilty  murderer  and  his  execution. 
"British  justice"  is  reputed  to  be  as  scrupulously 
fair  as  it  is  relentlessly  prompt,  and  this  reputation 
is  the  better  deserved  since  the  establishment  of  the 
Court  of  Criminal  Appeal ;  for  not  only  do  the  number 
of  cases  reversed  by  this  court  prove  the  imperative 
need  of  such  a  court,  but  its  presence  has  exercised 
a  wholesome  effect  in  making  the  courts  below  more 
careful. x 

'Alexander,  124. 


The  Criminal  Courts  185 

Not  only  is  British  justice  proverbially  fair  and 
prompt,  but  it  is  little  coloured  by  passion  and  sen- 
timentality, either  in  the  trial  or  the  pardon  of 
offenders.  When  to  the  pleas  for  the  life  of  Sir 
Roger  Casement  when  convicted  of  treason  on  the 
ground  that  his  execution  would  affect  public  senti- 
ment unfavourably,  particularly  in  America,  the 
Ministry  replied  that  in  England  they  neither  exe- 
cute innocent  men  nor  pardon  guilty  ones  for  reasons 
of  policy,  but  in  accordance  with  the  demands  of 
justice,  they  pointed  out  the  immovable  corner-stone 
on  which  the  temple  of  justice  must  be  squarely 
built;  but  to  many  Americans  it  was  an  utterance 
very  hard  to  comprehend. 

The  rarity  of  crimes  of  violence  in  England  is  of 
course  largely  due  to  the  settled  and  mature  stage 
of  its  society;  but  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  it  is 
also  largely  due  to  the  certainty  of  punishment. 
The  vast  majority  of  homicides  are  hanged  inside 
of  a  year.  England  has  the  lowest  average  of 
murders  of  any  country  in  the  world.  Men  will  not 
kill  each  other  if  speedy  hanging  is  a  practical  cer- 
tainty, any  more  than  they  will  thrust  their  hands 
into  a  fire  knowing  it  will  surely  burn  them. 

Pardon.  The  right  of  pardon  lies  nominally 
with  the  Crown,  but  actually  with  the  Secretary  of 
State  for  Home  Affairs.  It  is  exercised  sparingly. 

Summary.    In  closing  this  chapter,  we  may  review 


1 86  The  Judiciary 

the  various  grades  of  courts  in  the  reverse  order 
from  that  in  which  they  have  been  considered.  At 
the  top  is  the  House  of  Lords  (really  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor and  the  four  Lords  of  Appeal  in  Ordinary); 
immediately  below  is  the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal, 
composed  of  an  odd  number  of  judges  of  the  High 
Court  of  Justice;  next  are  two  courts  which  are  of 
the  same  grade  but  different  dignity,  the  King's 
Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice,  com- 
posed of  sixteen  judges,  and  the  Assizes  of  the  High 
Court  of  Justice  held  in  each  county  by  one  of  these 
judges.  Appeal  from  either  of  these  may  be  made 
to  the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal,  and  the  former  also 
decides  appeals  on  points  of  law  from  the  Quarter 
Sessions  and  Petty  Sessions.  The  Quarter  Sessions 
try  cases  on  appeal  from  the  Petty  Sessions  and  also 
try  in  the  first  instance  any  crimes  except  the  most 
serious,  which  are  reserved  for  the  Assizes.  At  the 
bottom  of  the  system  are  the  two  justices  without 
jury  exercising  summary  jurisdiction  in  petty  cases 
and  the  single  justice  committing  to  a  higher  court, 
granting  bail,  or  acting  as  a  sort  of  police  court  in 
trivial  offences. 

We  shall  now  take  up  the  courts  for  the  trial  of 
civil  cases. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE  CIVIL  COURTS 

The  Nature  of  Civil  Business.  Civil  law  is  much 
more  complicated  and  difficult  than  criminal  law; 
for  the  latter  is  concerned  more  directly  with  those 
fundamental  principles  of  right  and  wrong  that  ap- 
peal to  the  common  conscience  and  intelligence  of 
mankind,  whereas  the  former  has  to  do  with  the 
innumerable  questions  and  issues  arising  from  the 
endless  relationships  of  men  in  society  over  their 
property,  personal  rights,  and  obligations.  Any 
right  which  one  person  claims  and  another  disputes, 
or  any  injury  which  one  person  does  another,  may 
become  the  subject  matter  of  a  civil  suit.  If  one 
person  harms  another  by  repeating  a  slanderous 
rumour,  he  unquestionably  commits  a  wrong  and 
injury,  and  for  this  the  injured  party  may  secure 
money  damages  in  the  civil  court.  Even  a  crime, 
such  as  murder,  may  form  the  basis  for  a  civil  suit; 
for  the  civil  court  will  award  damages  to  the  heirs 
of  the  murdered  man  if  they  bring  suit,  since  an 

187 


i88  The  Judiciary 

injury  has  been  done  to  them.  In  trying  the  case 
in  the  civil  court  for  the  purpose  of  awarding  damages 
to  the  injured  person,  or  in  the  criminal  court  for 
meting  out  such  punishment  as  justice  and  public 
safety  demand,  the  civil  and  criminal  courts  act 
entirely  independently  of  each  other.  Thus  a  per- 
son may  be  acquitted  in  a  criminal  prosecution  for 
assaulting  another,  but  may  nevertheless  be  com- 
pelled by  the  civil  court  to  pay  heavy  damages  to 
the  person  assaulted. 

Common  Law.  In  early  times  there  was  little 
law-making  by  King  or  Parliament  and  society  was  in 
such  a  slowly  developing  state  that  few  new  laws 
were  needed.  Under  such  circumstances,  the  customs 
of  a  people  come  to  be  regarded  as  binding  and  in 
time  acquire  the  force  of  law.  It  is  necessary,  how- 
ever, that  some  authority  shall  interpret  and  apply 
these  customs.  This  was  the  duty  of  the  courts. 
Thus  through  the  centuries  the  English  courts  grad- 
ually built  up  a  set  of  rules  governing  most  of  the 
circumstances  which  are  likely  to  arise  in  the  rela- 
tions of  men  in  a  simple  society.  This  body  of 
customs  having  the  sanction  of  the  courts  is  known 
as  common  law.  Common  law  is  generally  defined 
to  be  that  which  hath  been  law  and  custom  since  the 
memory  of  man  runneth  not  to  the  contrary.  All 
the  ordinary  crimes  violating  the  fundamental 
rights  of  our  fellow-men,  such  as  murder,  assault 


The  Civil  Courts  189 

and  battery,  robbery,  house  burning,  were  thus 
recognized  as  wrong  and  were  punished  by  the 
courts  long  before  any  Parliament  undertook  to  pass 
on  the  subject.  These  are  known  as  common  law 
crimes.  Similarly  the  fundamental  rights  of  life, 
liberty,  and  property  were  early  recognized  and 
protected  by  the  courts,  such  as  the  right  of  the 
father  to  discipline  his  children  and  his  obligation 
to  furnish  them  with  the  necessities  of  life. 

The  law  governing  all  these  matters  has  been 
expanded  and  applied  to  new  conditions  by  the 
courts  through  the  centuries  of  the  development  of 
English  institutions,  until  it  has  become  an  immense 
body  of  law  which  requires  years  of  study  to  master. 
The  courts  which  enforce  it  are  known  as  common 
law  courts. 

Statute  Law.  As  time  went  on,  the  right  of  the 
judges  to  declare  what  should  be  binding  as  custom 
and  law  was  limited  by  the  determination  of  the  re- 
presentatives of  the  people  in  Parliament  to  make 
law  for  themselves.  Acts  passed  by  Parliament 
(or  any  such  legislative  body)  are  known  as  statute 
law,  because  it  originated  in  some  definite  statute. 
The  common  law  courts,  however,  enforce  statute 
law  just  as  they  do  common  law. 

Equity.  It  is  impossible  for  men  to  foresee  every 
circumstance  that  might  arise  and  the  peculiarities 
of  every  individual  case.  Therefore  many  cases 


190  The  Judiciary 

arose  in  which  the  law  did  not  properly  apply,  or  if 
it  should  be  enforced,  would  work  manifest  injustice, 
such  as  was  not  intended  by  its  makers.  In  such 
cases  it  was  customary  in  early  times  in  England  for 
the  person  aggrieved  to  apply  to  the  King,  as  no 
other  remedy  existed,  for  such  equitable  (that  is 
just)  relief  as  the  King's  sense  of  justice  might  sug- 
gest. The  King  referred  such  cases  to  the  high 
official  called  the  Chancellor,  who  was  considered 
the  " keeper  of  the  King's  conscience"  and  was  in 
those  days  practically  always  a  churchman,  with 
directions  to  afford  such  relief  as  the  case  demanded. 
The  necessity  for  this  extraordinary  power  arose  not 
so  much  out  of  conflict  with  the  provisions  of  the 
common  law,  but  rather  because  of  the  fact  that  the 
common  law  had  not  provided  for  such  cases  and 
hence  afforded  no  remedy;  though  in  some  cases  the 
Chancellor  did  actually  overrule  the  common  law 
in  his  decisions. 

The  court  which  the  Chancellor  thus  came  to 
hold  was  called  the  Chancery  Court,  and  the  body  of 
principles  and  rules  which  he  built  up  came  to  be 
called  equity,  in  distinction  from  law;  though  in  the 
general  meaning  of  law,  equity  is  a  part  of  the  law 
of  the  land. 

There  thus  grew  up  two  sets  of  courts,  law  courts 
and  equity  courts,  each  with  its  own  judges,  its  own 
rules,  and  its  own  methods. 


The  Civil  Courts  191 

No  Jury  in  Equity  Cases.  Bearing  in  mind  the 
difference  in  the  functions  of  the  judge  and  the  jury 
as  explained  on  page  172,  we  can  readily  understand 
the  different  practice  in  the  law  courts  and  the  equity 
courts  in  regard  to  the  jury.  Since  the  settlement 
of  disputed  matters  of  fact  is  one  of  the  chief  duties 
of  the  law  court,  it  always  employs  a  jury, x  and  the 
judge  simply  guides  and  assists  the  jury  by  instruct- 
ing them  in  the  law  in  the  case  before  them  and  in 
general  sees  that  all  the  proceedings  are  in  accord- 
ance with  law.  In  other  words,  the  jury  ascertains 
the  facts,  and  the  judge  applies  the  law  to  the  facts 
so  determined. 

Since  in  cases  in  equity,  however,  the  chief  task 
is  to  determine  what  is  essentially  just  in  a  certain 
set  of  circumstances,  and  the  determination  of  the 
mere  matters  of  fact  is  not  so  prominent,  the  pre- 
sence of  a  jury  is  not  only  unnecessary,  but  would 
render  impossible  the  attainment  of  the  object  in 
view,  namely,  the  determination  of  the  right  and 
just  decision  by  a  trained  mind  in  a  difficult  and  com- 
plicated set  of  circumstances.  Hence  the  rule  in 
law  cases  is  to  have  a  jury;  in  equity  cases  to  have 
no  jury,  but  to  leave  the  whole  case  to  the  Chancellor.2 

1  Except  in  civil  cases  as  explained  on  page  195. 

2  Since  even  in  an  equity  case,  however,  it  is  often  necessary  to 
settle  disputes  between  the  parties  as  to  the  facts  themselves,  the 
Chancellor  may  refer  the  determination  of  the  facts  to  a  jury,  while 
reserving  entirely  to  himself  the  determination  of  what  shall  be  done 
when  the  facts  are  so  established. 


192  The  Judiciary 

Steps  towards  Uniting  Law  and  Equity.    It  is 

now  provided  in  England  that  either  a  law  judge  or 
a  chancery  judge  may  apply  either  law  or  equity 
in  any  case  that  comes  before  him.  This  seems  a 
step  in  the  direction  of  removing  the  artificial  separa- 
tion of  cases,  practice,  methods,  and  courts  into  two 
divisions;  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  little  progress  has 
been  made  in  that  direction.  The  law  judge  or  the 
Chancellor  does  indeed  apply  either  law  or  equity 
as  is  necessary;  for  frequently  a  case  is  one  partly 
in  law  and  partly  in  equity ;  but  it  is  a  fact  that  the 
cases  are  still  divided  sharply  between  the  two  sets 
of  courts  according  as  they  fall  principally  under  law 
or  equity. 

In  most  American  States  the  separate  equity 
courts  have  been  abolished,  and  the  same  court 
applies  law  or  equity  in  the  trial  of  the  case  as  occa- 
sion requires.  But  each  case  is  still  regarded  as  an 
equity  case  or  a  law  case  as  its  circumstances  dictate, 
and  the  functions  of  the  judge  and  jury  respectively 
are  as  described  above. 

It  is  also  interesting  to  note  that  equity  has  lost 
most  of  its  early  flexibility  and  has  come  to  be  nearly 
as  rigid  as  the  "law,"  whose  rigidity  it  was  designed 
to  remedy.  The  Chancellor's  opinion  as  to  what 
is  equity  should  not  of  course  be  any  individual's 
mere  notion.  If  the  decrees  of  the  Chancellor  were 
to  be  of  practical  value  in  guiding  men  in  their 


The  Civil  Courts  193 

difficulties  they  must  be  consistent  in  themselves 
and  permanent  in  effect.  An  equity  case  once 
decided  became  a  precedent  for  similar  cases,  until 
a  long  line  of  decisions  by  his  predecessors  left  the 
Chancellor  deprived  of  the  option  of  granting  justice 
on  the  untrammelled  and  unsupported  dictates  of 
his  own  reason  and  conscience  almost  as  completely 
as  was  the  judge,  bound  by  acts  of  Parliament  and 
the  rules  of  the  common  law. 

The  County  Courts.  Having  now  explained  the 
meaning  of  civil  cases  and  pointed  out  the  two 
varieties,  law  and  equity,  we  shall  proceed  to  de- 
scribe the  courts  in  which  the  civil  law  is  adminis- 
tered, beginning,  as  in  the  previous  chapter,  with 
the  lowest  courts  and  passing  upwards  to  the 
highest. 

For  the  settlement  of  cases  of  minor  importance 
there  exist  a  large  number  of  courts  called  County 
Courts,  though  they  have  no  connection  with  county 
lines,  but  simply  retain  the  name  apparently  for 
the  sake  of  tradition.  For  this  purpose  England  is 
divided  into  more  than  five  hundred  districts,  in 
each  of  which  there  is  a  County  Court  which  meets 
at  least  once  a  month.1  The  districts  are  grouped 
into  about  fifty  circuits,  and  for  each  circuit  there  is 
a  judge,  who  must  be  a  lawyer  of  many  years'  train- 
ing. These  circuits  have  no  connection  with  those 

'Porritt,  116. 

13 


194  The  Judiciary 

which  have  been  described  in  connection  with  the 
Assizes. 

Jurisdiction  of  the  County  Courts.  The  business 
of  the  County  Courts  is  purely  civil,  as  they  have 
no  criminal  jurisdiction  whatever.  Their  purpose 
is  to  supply  prompt  and  cheap  settlement  of  the 
vast  mass  of  controversies  involving  small  amounts 
which  arise  in  the  ordinary  business  of  commerce 
and  the  relations  of  men  in  society.  The  procedure 
is  much  more  simple  than  in  the  higher  courts,  so 
much  so  that  many  persons  conduct  their  own 
cases.  They  administer  both  law  and  equity,  and 
can  try  any  case  in  the  former  in  which  the  amount 
involved  does  not  exceed  £100  and  in  the  latter  in 
which  it  does  not  exceed  £500.  Certain  cases, 
however,  which  involve  unusual  difficulties  of  law 
are  withheld  from  them,  no  matter  how  small  the 
amount. 

In  cases  involving  over  £20,  or  in  smaller  cases 
with  the  consent  of  the  judges,  appeal  may  be  made 
from  the  County  Court  to  the  High  Court  of  Justice 
in  London.1  The  appeal  is  generally  heard  by  the 
King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court.2 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  452,  n.  3. 

3  For  the  divisions  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice,  see  pp.  176-77- 
Admiralty  cases  go  by  appeal  to  the  Admiralty  Division.  Though 
the  Chancery  Division  does  not  formally  receive  "appeals  "  except 
from  its  own  subordinates,  the  masters  and  conveyancing  counsel, 
it  sometimes  reviews  or  restrains  the  County  Courts  in  equity 
matters.  For  brief  statement,  see  Britannica,  ii.,  211-12. 


The  Civil  Courts  195 

Juries  in  Civil  Cases.  While  the  jury  is  always 
used  in  criminal  cases  above  the  courts  of  summary 
jurisdiction, r  this  is  not  true  in  civil  cases.  Both  in 
the  Assizes  and  in  the  inferior  courts,  either  party  in 
a  lawsuit  has  the  right  to  demand  a  jury;  but  it  is 
probably  more  common  to  agree  to  do  away  with  the 
jury  and  submit  both  law  and  fact  to  the  decision 
of  the  judge.  In  the  County  Courts  the  jury  num- 
bers eight;  in  the  higher  courts  twelve.  In  any 
civil  case  a  verdict  may,  by  the  consent  of  both 
sides,  be  rendered  by  a  majority  of  the  jury,  though 
in  criminal  cases  a  unanimous  verdict  is  always 
required. 

There  are  three  classes  of  juries  in  England  for 
civil  cases.  First  are  ordinary  juries,  which  are  drawn 
from  citizens  owning  land  worth  an  annual  rental 
of  £10  a  year,  with  certain  other  qualifications  for 
non-landowners — the  same  qualifications  as  required 
for  jurors  in  criminal  cases.  Second,  there  are  special 
juries  drawn  from  bankers,  merchants,  or  men  occu- 
pying land  or  buildings  of  considerably  greater  value; 
and  third,  there  are  extra  special  juries  drawn  from 
the  list  of  the  special  jurors  of  a  considerably  wider 
area  than  is  the  case  with  other  juries.  The  ordinary 
juror  receives  only  a  shilling  a  day;  the  special  juror 
receives  in  addition  a  lump  sum  of  one  guinea  for 
each  case.  The  special  jury  can  be  demanded  by 

1  /.  e.  courts  trying  small  cases  without  jury.     See  page  166. 


196  The  Judiciary 

either  party  to  a  suit.  The  one  making  the  demand 
pays  the  extra  expense.  They  are  growing  in  popu- 
larity, as  their  judgments  are  more  relied  upon  than 
are  those  of  the  ordinary  jury.1  This  presents  a 
striking  contrast  with  the  tendency  in  the  United 
States,  where  instead  of  putting  the  qualification 
for  jurors  higher  than  that  for  voters,  and  then  in 
addition  providing  for  the  employment  of  men  of 
unusual  intelligence  and  training  for  the  more  diffi- 
cult cases,  the  law  too  often  exempts  large  classes  of 
the  community  whose  daily  vocations  and  general 
education  and  intelligence  best  fit  them  for~  the 
difficult  task  of  weighing  evidence  and  keeping 
themselves  free  from  the  appeals  of  prejudice  and 
passion. 

The  justification  for  the  special  jury  in  civil  cases 
lies  in  the  fact  that  such  questions  are  often  more 
difficult  than  criminal  trials,  and  that  they  sometimes 
involve  facts  of  commerce  or  land  tenure  of  such  a 
technical  nature  as  to  render  long  familiarity  with 
these  matters  very  needful  in  the  juror.  The  guilt 
or  innocence  of  a  man  being  tried  for  his  life  on  the 
charge  of  killing  his  neighbour  is  of  much  more 
importance,  but  is  not  nearly  so  difficult  as  to  ascer- 
tain the  right  to  the  property  involved  in  a  disputed 
bill  of  exchange  or  a  deed  transferring  an  entailed 
estate. 

•^  'Lowell,  ii.,  459-60;  Porritt,  108;  Britannica,  xv.,  590-92. 


The  Civil  Courts  197 

The  Assizes.  We  recall  from  the  last  chapter 
that  the  Court  of  Assize  consists  of  a  judge  or  judges 
of  the  High  Court  of  Justice  in  London  sent  down  on 
circuit  to  hold  court  in  the  various  counties  of  the 
country.  The  Assizes  have  both  criminal  and  civil 
jurisdiction.  In  the  latter  they  can  try  any  case 
in  law  or  equity ;  though  the  more  important  cases  in 
equity  are  carried  in  the  first  instance  directly  to  the 
Chancery  Division  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice  in 
London.  The  Assizes  are  held  in  each  county  at 
least  four  times  a  year  for  criminal  business  and 
generally  twice  a  year  for  civil  business. 

The  High  Court  of  Justice.  It  is  now  necessary 
to  explain  more  fully  the  nature  and  organization  of 
the  High  Court  of  Justice,  to  which  frequent  allusion 
has  been  made.  This  court  has  authority  over  all 
England  and  Wales,  and  is  the  successor  of  the 
great  national  courts  of  the  kings  of  the  Middle 
Ages  by  means  of  which  law  was  made  national 
and  uniform  and  England  given  such  a  start  be- 
yond the  nations  of  the  continent  in  the  orderly 
administration  of  justice.1  It  is  organized  in  three 
divisions:  the  Chancery  Division,  with  seven  judges, 
of  which  the  Lord  Chancellor  is  President;  the 
King's  Bench  Division,  with  sixteen  judges,  of 
which  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  is  President ;  and  the 
Probate,  Divorce,  and  Admiralty  Division,  with 

1  See  page  177,  above. 


198  The  Judiciary 

two  judges,  one  of  whom  is  designated  as  President 
of  that  Division. 

The  duties  of  the  Chancery  Division  are  to  hear 
cases  in  equity.1  These  may  be  heard  by  masters, 
conveyancing  counsel,  County  Courts,  or  the  As- 
sizes, or  may  be  carried  to  the  Chancery  Division 
in  London  in  the  first  instance.  The  Chancery 
Division  sometimes  interferes  to  correct  a  County 
Court,  but  regularly  hears  appeals  only  from  its 
equity  officers,  the  masters  and  conveyancing 
counsel.2 

The  King's  Bench  Division  will  be  recalled  as 
that  Division  of  the  High  Court  of  Justice  whose 
judges  are  sent  on  circuit  to  hold  the  Assizes.  The 
King's  Bench  Division  has  original  jurisdiction  in 
certain  criminal  cases  of  unusual  importance.3  Its 
other  duties  are  to  hear  appeals  on  errors  in  law  from 
the  Courts  of  Petty  and  Quarter  Sessions.4  It 
hears  such  appeals  in  civil  matters  also  from  the 
County  Courts  except  in  a  few  classes  of  cases. 

The  Probate,  Divorce,  and  Admiralty  Division  hears 
in  the  first  instance  all  divorce  cases  and  hears 
on  appeal  cases  from  the  lower  courts  having  to  do 
with  wills  (Probate)  and  maritime  law  (Admiralty). 

It  is  thus  plain  that  though  the  seven  judges  of 


1  See  above,  pages  189-90. 

a  Jenks's  Short  History  of  English  Law,  362. 

3  See  above,  page  179.  4  See  pages  166-9  above. 


The  Civil  Courts  199 

the  Chancery  Division,  the  sixteen  of  the  King's 
Bench  Division,  and  the  two  of  the  Probate,  Divorce, 
and  Admiralty  Division  are  called  as  a  whole  the 
High  Court  of  Justice,  there  is  really  no  such  court  ; 
for  they  never  meet  as  a  whole  and  have  no  duties 
as  a  whole.  From  their  number  are  chosen  the 
judges  who  go  on  circuit  to  hold  "a  court  of  the  said 
High  Court,"  called  the  Assize  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice;  and  so  on  with  all  the  courts  which  its 
judges  hold.  Such  courts  are  made  up  of  one  or 
more  of  the  judges  chosen  from  the  High  Court  to 
hold  some  special  court,  called  the  Chancery  Divi- 
sion, or  some  other,  of  the  High  Court. 

Though  the  High  Court  of  Justice  is  organized  in 
three  Divisions  each  with  its  own  group  of  judges,  yet 
a  judge  of  one  Division  may  sit  in  any  other  Division. 
This  has  the  advantage  of  flexibility;  but  more  im- 
portant than  this  is  the  fact  that  any  Division  of  the 
court  may  administer  either  law  or  equity,  as  ex- 
plained on  page  192. 

The  Court  of  Appeal.  This  eminent  tribunal  consists 
of  five  Lords  Justices  of  Appeal  appointed  specifically 
to  this  office  and  of  the  following  ex-officio  members: 
the  Lord  Chancellor  and  any  former  Lord  Chancellor 
whom  he  may  invite,  the  Lord  Chief  Justice,1 

'The  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  the  King's  Bench  Division  of  the 
High  Court  of  Justice  (see  page  197),  commonly  spoken  of  as  The 
Lord  Chief  Justice  of  England  or  the  Chief  Justice. 


2oo  The  Judiciary 

the  Master  of  the  Rolls, x  and  the  President  of  the  Pro- 
bate, Divorce,  and  Admiralty  Division.2  Stated 
more  briefly,  the  Court  of  Appeal  consists  of  its  own 
six  justices  (for  the  Master  of  the  Rolls  belongs  only 
to  it)  and  the  Presidents  of  the  three  Divisions  of  the 
High  Court  of  Justice  ex-officio.  The  six  regular  judges 
work  in  two  sections  and  so  virtually  constitute  two 
courts.  The  absence  of  a  member  or  the  necessity  of 
organizing  a  third  section  or  of  securing  wider  judg- 
ment may  be  met  by  calling  in  ex-officio  members. 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Appeal  is  purely 
civil,  but  in  this  it  is  quite  far  reaching.  Except  in 
prize  cases,  it  hears  appeals  from  any  Division  of 
the  High  Court  of  Justice  and  from  certain  courts 
below  that  tribunal.  We  may  say  briefly,  without 
any  attempt  at  outlining  the  complex  rules  governing 
the  matter,  that  its  jurisdiction  extends  to  appeals 
arising  in  England  and  Wales  in  cases  of  equity,  to 
appeals  on  errors  in  law,  to  certain  appeals  from 
County  Courts, 3  and  to  appeals  on  questions  of  law 
from  the  Railway  and  Canal  Commission. 4 

The  Supreme  Court  of  Judicature.  To  conclude 
our  description  of  this  very  complicated  system,  the 

1  An  ancient  and  honourable  judge;  until  1881  a  member  of  the 
Chancery  Court,  but  since  that  time  "a  member  of  the  Court  of 
Appeal  only." 

2  See  page  197. 

3  Cases  under  the  Agricultural  Holdings  Acts  and  the  Working- 
men's  Compensation  Acts. 

4  For  appeals  from  'Scotland,  Ireland,  the  colonies,  and  church 
courts,  see  Chapter  XVIII. 


The  Civil  Courts  201 

High  Court  of  Justice  and  the  Court  of  Appeal 
taken  together  are  called  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Judicature.  This,  however,  is  really  not  a  court, 
but  only  a  name  for  a  collection  of  courts,  each  of 
which  attends  separately  to  its  own  business.  No 
such  body  as  the  Supreme  Court  of  Judicature  ever 
meets,  deliberates,  tries  cases,  or  renders  decisions. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  Judicature  was  created  be- 
fore the  Court  of  Criminal  Appeal, x  and  hence  the  lat- 
ter was  not  included  as  a  part  of  the  former.  It  is 
virtually  a  part  of  it,  however,  as  its  judges  are  chosen 
from  it,  and  as  it  is  the  counterpart  in  criminal 
jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Appeal  in  civil  business. 

The  House  of  Lords.  The  function  of  the  House 
of  Lords  as  the  supreme  and  final  court  of  appeal  in 
England  has  already  been  explained  on  page  182. 
In  civil  cases  there  is  not  the  necessity  of  obtaining 
the  Attorney-General's  or  any  one  else's  consent 
for  an  appeal  from  the  Court  of  Appeals  to  the  Lords. 
A  civil  suit  not  being  a  matter  concerning  the  gov- 
ernment, no  government  official  has  any  part  in  it 
save  to  sit  as  judge  or  to  perform  such  duties  as 
sheriff  or  clerk  as  the  judge  may  direct. 

Reference  to  the  table  of  courts  following  page 
372  will  serve  as  a  review  of  the  last  two  chapters 
and  help  to  make  clearer  a  quite  difficult  subject. 

1  See  page  180. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

MISCELLANEOUS  FACTS  ABOUT  THE  COURTS 

The  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council. 

First  among  the  features  of  the  English  judicial 
system,  omitted  in  the  two  preceding  chapters  in 
order  to  give  a  clear  account  of  the  courts,  is  the 
Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council.  The 
Privy  Council,  as  explained  on  page  124,  is  now 
merely  an  honorary  body,  taking  no  part  in  the 
government.  Yet  certain  important  officials  or 
groups  of  officials  are  nominally  committees  of  the 
Privy  Council.  Such  is  the  case  in  the  present 
instance.  A  half  dozen  or  more  persons  who  bear 
the  title  of  Privy  Councillor  and  have  the  requisite 
qualifications  of  profound  legal  learning  are  de- 
signated as  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council.  These  are  the  Lord  Chancellor,  the  four 
Lords  of  Appeal  in  Ordinary,  several  judges  who 
have  held  high  judicial  positions  in  India  or  some 
self-governing  colony,  and,  if  invited,  several  other 
judges  of  high  standing. 

202 


Miscellaneous  Facts  about  Courts    203 

Powers  of  the  Judicial  Committee.  The  Judicial 
Committee  of  the  Privy  Council  is  the  highest  court 
of  appeal  in  all  cases  from  the  church  courts  and 
from  the  highest  courts  of  the  colonies,  and,  after 
the  Home  Rule  Act  goes  into  force,  from  the  highest 
court  of  Ireland.1  The  strange  fact  that  this  body 
of  laymen,  any  member  of  whom  might  be  a  mem- 
ber of  some  other  than  the  established  church  or 
of  no  church  at  all,  should  have  the  last  word  as 
to  what  is  law  in  religious  matters,  is  an  incident  of 
the  union  of  church  and  state. 

The  Central  Criminal  Court.  In  describing  the 
criminal  courts  we  passed  over  the  fact  that  there 
is  a  different  arrangement  in  London  from  that  in 
the  rest  of  the  country.  There  a  judge  of  the  High 
Court  of  Justice  and  several  judges  for  the  city 
hold  the  Central  Criminal  Court  once  a  month. 
They  sit  in  four  or  five  divisions,  each  being  in  effect 
a  complete  court.  The  court  discharges  for  the 
metropolis  the  functions  of  both  the  Quarter  Ses- 
sions and  the  Assizes.  It  tries  a  large  proportion 
of  the  criminal  business  of  the  entire  kingdom, 
due  to  the  vast  population  and  peculiar  problems 
of  the  capital. 

Appointment  and  Tenure  of  Judges.  The  Lord 
Chancellor  appoints  all  judges  from  the  highest  to 

1  Previous  to  that,  the  House  of  Lords  was  the  supreme  court  of 
appeal  from  Ireland  as  from  Scotland. 


204  The  Judiciary 

the  lowest,  including  justices  of  the  peace,  with  four 
exceptions:  he  himself  and  the  Lord  Chief  Justice 
(the  head  of  the  King's  Bench  Division  of  the  High 
Court  of  Justice),  the  judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeal, 
and  the  four  Lords  of  Appeal  in  Ordinary  are  ap- 
pointed by  the  Prime  Minister.1  The  justices  of 
the  peace  and  the  judges  of  the  County  Court 
are  removable  on  the  recommendation  of  the  Lord 
Chancellor;  but  removal  occurs  only  for  improper 
conduct,  and  never  for  partisan  or  personal  reasons. 
The  judges  of  higher  grade  are  removable  by  im- 
peachment, or  they  may  be  removed  by  the  Crown 
on  petition  of  a  mere  majority  vote  of  the  two 
houses  of  Parliament. 

The  salaries  of  all  English  judges  are  much  higher 
than  those  in  the  United  States.  The  justices  of  the 
peace,  however,  receive  no  pay. 

Non- Judicial  Duties  of  the  Justices  of  the  Peace. 
The  justices  of  the  peace  were  originally  a  superior 
grade  of  police  officer  rather  than  judges,  and  with 
time  they  came  to  be  "the  state's  man  of  all  work"; 
for  on  them  were  placed  the  increasing  tasks  of  the 
care  of  the  poor  and  the  administration  of  local 
government  in  general.  They  still  retain  a  few  of 
these  powers,  one  of  the  chief  of  which  is  to  call  out 

1  It  is  of  course  understood  that  they  are  all  appointed  nominally 
by  the  King;  the  actual  selecting  of  the  men  is,  however,  as  stated  in 
the  text. 


Miscellaneous  Facts  about  Courts    205 

the  troops  in  case  of  riot.  They  have  the  authority 
to  read  the  riot  act,  and  after  waiting  a  reasonable 
time  for  the  rioters  to  disperse,  to  order  the  troops 
to  fire. 

Barristers  and  Solicitors.  A  distinction  exists  be- 
tween the  members  of  the  bar  in  England  to  which 
the  practice  in  America  is  a  complete  stranger.  This 
is  the  division  of  lawyers  into  two  classes  with  differ- 
ent privileges  and  to  a  great  extent  with  different 
tasks.  The  lower  rank  of  attorneys  are  called  so- 
licitors. They  are  admitted  to  practice  after  an 
examination  by  an  association  of  solicitors  authorized 
by  Parliament  to  conduct  examinations  and  main- 
tain the  standards  of  the  profession.  A  solicitor 
cannot  practice  in  any  court  above  the  grade  of  the 
County  Court  and  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions. 
If  the  case  is  of  a  character  which  requires  argument 
in  a  higher  court,  the  solicitor  collects  the  evidence, 
prepaies  all  the  papers,  and  in  general  gets  the  case 
in  shape  for  trial.  He  then  employs  a  lawyer  known 
as  a  barrister  to  conduct  the  case  before  the  court. 

The  barrister  is  admitted  to  the  bar  on  examination 
by  one  of  the  four  ancient  associations  in  London 
known  as  the  Inns  of  Court.  He  can  practice  in 
courts  of  any  grade  and  may  render  legal  service  of 
any  kind;  but  he  must  not  be  employed  directly  by 
the  client,  or  person  interested  in  the  case.  The 
client  employs  a  solicitor  and  has  communication 


206  The  Judiciary 

only  with  his  solicitor.  If  a  barrister  is  required  or 
desired,  the  solicitor  employs  him,  though  of  course 
the  client  pays.  While  solicitors  are  found  all  over 
the  country,  the  barristers  generally  reside  in  London 
and  go  out  to  the  Assizes  with  the  judges  of  the  High 
Court  on  circuit;  but  a  few  barristers  have  their 
residence  in  the  larger  cities  outside  London. 

While  barristers  confine  themselves  strictly  to  the 
practice  of  law,  the  solicitors  perform  many  services 
for  their  clients  of  a  business  rather  than  a  legal 
nature.  It  is  thought  by  some  that  this  division  of 
the  legal  profession  into  two  classes,  one  of  which  is 
employed  only  by  another  class  of  the  profession 
itself,  makes  for  the  dignity  and  purity  of  practice 
and  for  the  development  of  law  as  a  science  to  a  higher 
degree  than  does  the  American  system  in  which  the 
members  of  the  bar  observe  no  such  distinction. x 

Scotland  and  Ireland.  Before  the  union  of  Scot- 
land and  England,  the  former  was  in  close  contact 
with  France  and  hence  its  law  came  to  be  much 
influenced  by  the  Roman  law.  The  two  systems  of 
courts  and  practice  are  still  kept  separate,  although 
appeal  lies  from  the  highest  court  in  Scotland  to  the 
House  of  Lords  in  London. 

In  Ireland  certain  differences  exist  in  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  courts ;  but  the  system  of  law  and  practice 
is  essentially  the  same  as  in  England.  _As  in  Scot- 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  468-69. 


Miscellaneous  Facts  about  Courts  207 

land,  appeal  lies  from  the  highest  court  in  Ireland  to 
the  House  of  Lords  in  London;  but  after  the  Home 
Rule  Act  goes  into  effect,  final  appeal  from  the  Irish 
courts  will  be  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council. z 

1  See  page  202. 


PART  IV.    POLITICS  AND  ELECTIONS 

CHAPTER  XIX 

PARTY  ORGANIZATIONS 

Party  Organizations  lessPowerfulinJEngland  than 
in  the~United  States.  Though  the  United  Kingdom 
is  covered  with  party  clubs  and  associations,  the 
organizations  are  not  so  systematic  or  important  as 
in  the  United  States.  The  principal  reasons  for  the 
greater  power  and  more  thorough  system  of  the  party 
organization  in  our  country  seem  to  be,  firitJ  thefact 
that  our  elections  come  at  regular  statedontervals, 
thus  making  it  easier  to  prepare  and  maintain  a  vast 
political  machine  to  t}e  wheeled  into  action  at  the 
appointed  time;  sec^»dj  the  fact  that  the  election  of 
the  President  has  called  for  a  national  .nominating 
convention  resting  upon  a  whole  series  of  lesser  con- 
ventions; third,  the  American  custom  of  distributing 
thousands  of  offices,  and  in  many  States  and  cities 
lucrative  public  contracts  as  well,  in  reward  for  po- 
litical support.  We  do  not  assert  the  absence  of  all 

208 


Party  Organizations  209 

tl^ese  causes  of  strong  party  organization  in  England ; 
we  only  point  out  their  greater  frequency  and  power 
in  the  United  States. 

Local  Party  Organizations.  In  every  town  or 
city  in  England  there  is  likely  to  be  found  an  Asso- 
ciation of  the  members  of  each  of  the  great  parties, 
Conservative  and  Liberal.  They  usually  comprise 
only  a  small  proportion  of  the  voters  in  the  locality, 
but  they  form  a  serviceable  nucleus  for  agitation. 
These  local  Associations  send  delegates  in  proportion 
to  the  population  of  the  community  to  the  party 
Association  for  the  whole  parliamentary  election 
district.1 

The  District  Association  and  the  District  Executive 
Committee.  In  the  district  Association  we  have  a 
more  important  wheel  in  the  machine  of  party  man- 
agement. This  wheel  does  not  move  itself,  however, 
but  is  turned  by  the  executive  committee  for  the 
district.  That  is  to  say,  the  most  important  action 
is  taken  on  the  suggestion  and  leadership  of  the  execu- 
tive committee,  and  the  district  Association  is  mainly 
used  for  confirming  their  action  and  rallying  party 
enthusiasm.  Those  familiar  with  party  manage- 

1  The  English  speak  of  the  area  electing  a  member  of  Parliament 
as  a  parliamentary  division,  but  on  account  of  the  word  division 
being  used  in  the  United  States  in  connection  with  parliamentary 
bodies  only  to  indicate  a  certain  practice  in  voting  (see  page  77) , 
the  word  district  is  here  used  to  indicate  the  portion  of  the  country 
electing  a  member. 
14 


210  Politics  and  Elections 

ment  in  the  United  States  know  that,  although  not 
so  openly  professed,  much  the  same  is  true  in  this 
country.  It  is  impossible  for  a  large  convention  as- 
sembled for  a  day  or  so  only  at  long  intervals,  and 
composed  of  men  previously  unacquainted,  to  act 
with  much  real  self-direction  or  to  do  otherwise  than 
follow  the  lead  of  prominent  party  men  who  are 
entrusted  with  the  conduct  of  the  campaign. 

Nominating  the  Parliamentary  Candidate.  The 
district  Association  formally  nominates  the  party's 
candidate  in  that  district  for  Parliament;  but  as  a 
matter  of  fact  the  real  nominating  body  is  the  district 
executive  committee.  If  the  executive  committee  is 
satisfied  with  a  man  who  intimates  his  ambition,  it 
has  him  put  forth  as  the  candidate.  If  they  wish  to 
see  an  exhibition  of  his  powers,  a  public  meeting  may 
be  arranged  at  which  he  addresses  the  voters.  In 
case  of  several  aspirants,  the  executive  committee 
may  suggest  two  or  three  names  to  the  meeting  of  the 
Association;  but  it  is  expected  that  the  committee 
will  give  the  party  the  benefit  of  their  care  and  judg- 
ment at  least  to  the  extent  of  eliminating  all  but  the 
two  or  three  most  desirable  men. 

The  District  Agent.  Another  feature  of  the  organ- 
ization of  the  parliamentary  election  district  must  be 
noticed — the  district  Agent  of  the  party.  This  use- 
ful party  servant  is  peculiar  to  English  politics.  He 
holds  a  recognized  salaried  position  and  gives  in  some 


Party  Organizations 


211 


instances  his  whole  time  to  serving  the  interests  of 
the  party.  The  law  requires  every  candidate  for 
Parliament  to  have  a  responsible  election  Agent,  in 
order  that  illegitimate  practices  may  be  prevented, 
or  at  least  may  be  more  definitely  fixed  upon  some 
person  who  may  be  held  to  account.  It  is  customary 
for  the  candidate  to  choose  for  this  purpose  the  party 
district  Agent. 

The  National  Convention.  Above  the  district 
Association  is  the  national  convention/composed  of 
representatives  in  rough  proportion  to  population 
from  the  various  district  Associations.  That  of  the 
Conservatives  is  called  the  Conservative  National 
Union;  that  of  the  Liberals,  the  National  Liberal 
Federation.  As  there  is  no  duty  of  nominating  a 
President  or  Prime  Minister  or  really  framing  a  party 
platform,  these  gatherings  are  really  little  more  than 
organizations  for  developing  party  enthusiasm,  keep- 
ing the  voters  in  line,  and  winning  elections.  They 
meet  annually,  rotating  year  after  year  among  the 
large  cities  of  the  country,  and  are  addressed  by  the 
most  prominent  party  leaders. 

Though  the  national  convention  adopts  a  formal 
declaration  of  party  principles,  its  action  in  this 
regard  is  merely  the  perfunctory  registering  of  ap- 
proval to  a  set  of  declarations  on  which  the  party  is 
well  agreed  and  rarely  gives  rise  to  serious  contro- 
versy. The  platform  adopted  by  the  national  con- 


212  Politics  and  Elections 

vention  even  in  America  has  often  been  found  quite 
impracticable  when  later  brought  to  the  test  in 
Congress ;  and  in  England  the  very  nature  of  parlia- 
mentary government  under  the  leadership  of  a  re- 
sponsible Ministry  makes  the  authoritative  statement 
of  a  platform  almost  impossible  for  any  other  collec- 
tion of  men  than  the  Cabinet.  If  the  Ministry  are 
to  be  responsible  for  carrying  out  a  program  and 
liable  to  immediate  expulsion  from  office  in  case  of 
failure,  they  must  be  allowed  the  shaping  of  it,  sub- 
ject, of  course,  to  dismissal  if  in  this  way  they  fail  to 
express  the  aspirations  of  the  party. 

The  National  Executive  Committee.  Any  real 
deliberation  in  connection  with  the  national  conven- 
tions of  the  two  parties  is  in  their  executive  com- 
mittees, and  these  are  strongly  under  the  influence  of 
their  party  chiefs.  Any  other  plan  under  the  English 
system  of  politics  would  lead  to  disorganization  in  the 
party  and  weakness  in  the  government. 

The  National  Central  Office.  Just  as  the  party 
has  in  each  parliamentary  election  district  the  party 
Agent,  so  each  has  for  the  whole  country  a  Central 
Office  in  charge  of  a  skilful  party  manager.  It  is 
the  headquarters  for  political  warfare,  and  is  under 
the  immediate  control  of  the  national  leaders  of  the 
party.  It  advises  local  party  leaders,  sends  out  im- 
mense quantities  of  literature,  and  even  gives  money 
aid  in  poor  districts. 


Party  Organizations  213 

Raising  Funds  for  the  Party.  A  word  may  be  said 
regarding  the  sources  from  which  party  funds  are 
drawn.  As  there  is  no  protective  tariff  legislation 
and  little  agitation  on  "trusts"  and  railroads,  the 
ever-present  resource  of  squeezing  the  corporations 
or  their  officers  and  stockholders  on  the  implied  pro- 
mise of  immunity  from  unwelcome  legislation  hardly 
exists.  The  Associations,  local  and  national,  have 
a  system  of  honorary  vice-presidents,  life  member- 
ships, etc.,  with  which  they  appeal  to  the  vanity  or 
patriotism  of  their  members  and  so  draw  a  consider- 
able revenue  from  the  well-to-do.  It  is  a  sad,  but 
generally  recognized,  fact  that  another  fruitful  source 
of  money  sometimes  employed  is  the  virtual  sale  of 
titles  of  honour,  in  some  cases  even  peerages,  in  re- 
turn for  long-continued  generous  contributions  to  the 
party  purse.  Of  course  no  word  is  hinted  of  a  bargain ; 
but  doubtless  if  the  honours  did  not  come,  neither 
would  the  money.  The  party  leaders  protest  that 
they  never  recommend  for  honours  any  man  who  does 
not  fully  deserve  the  recognition  for  some  personal 
distinction  or  public  service.  But  after  all  is  said, 
it  remains  one  of  the  ugliest  features  of  the  flunkey- 
ism,  title-worship,  and  influence  of  mere  money  in 
English  social  and  political  life. 

Influence  of  Women  in  Politics.  Though  women 
cannot  vote  in  parliamentary  elections,  their  influ- 
ence in  politics  is  considerable.  Many  ladies  of 


214  Politics  and  Elections 

wealth  and  title  take  an  active  and  intelligent  inter- 
est in  party  success  and  public  measures,  and  by  the 
great  value  of  their  friendship  and  social  influence 
are  a  power  in  swaying  to  their  views  members  of 
Parliament  who  have  social  ambitions,  or  whose 
wives  or  daughters  have  such.  It  is  hard  for  a  social 
"climber"  to  vote  against  the  charming  (though 
none  the  less  threatening)  urgency  of  a  brilliant  social 
leader  whose  invitations  give  prestige  throughout  the 
kingdom. 

The  women  of  the  Conservative  party  are  organ- 
ized in  the  Primrose  League,  which  appeals  with  great 
ingenuity  to  the  reverence  for  rank  and  the  pride  in 
being  associated  with  nobility  that  is  such  a  common 
human  trait.  Its  members  include  the  highest 
nobles  and  their  wives  and  all  social  classes,  down  to 
day  labourers.  The  more  prominent  female  mem- 
bers are  "Dames,"  the  men  "Knights,"  while  the 
officers  bear  high-sounding  titles  drawn  from  mediae- 
val chivalry.  The  women  are  particularly  active 
workers,  and  the  organization  is  one  which  its  ene- 
mies, the  Liberals,  hate  and  fear. 

The  women  on  the  Liberal  side  have  organized  in 
opposition,  but  hardly  with  the  success  of  the  Con- 
servatives. Still,  on  both  sides  women  make  splen- 
did political  workers  and  can  frequently  win  votes 
where  men  would  be  repelled. 

Contrast   between   Liberals   and    Conservatives. 


Party  Organizations  215 

We  may  notice  briefly  the  differences  between  the 
Conservative  and  Liberal  parties  and  the  classes  of 
which  they  are  composed.  In  a  vague  general  way 
the  Conservatives  may  be  said  to  correspond  to  the 
Republican  party  in  the  United  States1  and  the  Lib- 
eral to  the  Democratic.  The  landed  and  aristocratic 
classes  are  overwhelmingly  Conservative,  just  as 
most  of  the  wealthy  classes  in  the  United  States 
are  Republicans.  The  working  classes  in  England 
are  mainly  Liberal,  and  the  professional  and  small 
business  men  are  divided  between  the  two  parties. 
The  Episcopalians  generally  are  Conservatives  and  the 
members  of  the  other  churches  mostly  Liberals.  The 
policies  of  the  Liberals  thus  naturally  include  more 
measures  which  would  appeal  to  the  masses  of  the 
people;  but  the  Conservatives  bid  hard  for  popular 
support  and  sometimes  even  go  beyond  the  offers  of 
their  rivals.  Consequently  some  of  the  great  meas- 
ures of  reform  have  been  enacted  by  one  party  and 
some  by  the  other,  though  the  initiative  in  such 
movements  usually  lies  with  the  Liberals. 

Divisions  along  class  lines  have  become  more 
marked  of  late  years.  As  has  been  strikingly  said, 
there  used  to  be  Conservative  peers  and  Conservative 
cabmen,  but  now  nearly  all  peers  are  Conservatives 
and  nearly  all  cabmen  Liberals.  The  new  alignment 

1  Or  more  correctly  in  the  North.  As  there  is  only  one  real 
party  in  the  South,  these  remarks  have  no  application  to  that  section. 


216  Politics  and  Elections 

is  due  to  the  masses'  seeking  to  assert  their  interests 
through  the  agency  of  political  organization  and 
government  activity  and  the  natural  rallying  of  most 
members  of  the  privileged  and  wealthy  classes  in 
mutual  determination  to  retain  the  advantages  which 
they  possess.  Whether  this  bodes  ill  or  well  for  the 
future  is  a  very  large  and  complicated  question  in 
which  the  interests  and  prejudices  of  the  individual 
are  inextricably  mingled  with  considerations  of  the 
general  welfare.  Of  one  thing  we  may  be  sure :  either 
people  are  very  generally  and  peculiarly  wrongheaded, 
or  there  is  something  wrong  in  the  social  conditions 
that  produce  such  an  alignment. 


CHAPTER  XX 

ELECTIONS  TO  PARLIAMENT 

Selecting  the  Candidate.  As  remarked  in  the  last 
chapter,  the  real  selection  of  the  parliamentary  can- 
didate is  in  the  hands  of  the  executive  committee  of 
the  party  Association  of  the  district,  or  perhaps  of  a 
small  special  committee  appointed  for  the  purpose. 
A  few  districts  elect  two  members,  but  the  great 
bulk  of  them  choose  only  one. 

The  party  in  power  regularly  renominates  the  sit- 
ting member  and  the  other  party  the  man  who  last 
represented  them,  unless  there  is  some  special  reason 
to  the  contrary,  such  as  neglect  of  duty  or  voting 
against  party  measures.  This  is  one  of  the  many 
manifestations  of  the  conservative  habits  of  the 
English  and  their  idea  of  a  man's  having  a  sort  of 
vested  right  in  any  position  which  he  has  held  for  a 
long  time.  So  generally  accepted  is  this  custom  that 
many  districts  have  "permanent  candidates,"  who 
it  is  conceded  shall  represent  their  party  at  the 
next  election.  Hence  the  temptation  is  strong  for 

217 


218  Politics  and  Elections 

these  men  to  spend  money  constantly  on  objects 
likely  to  win  popularity,  such  as  relieving  the  poor, 
contributing  to  local  causes,  etc.,  instead  of  prac- 
tising these  means  of  vote-winning  extensively  only 
during  the  weeks  comprising  the  campaign. 

"  Nursing"  a  Constituency.  This  is  called  "  nurs- 
ing" a  constituency.  It  constitutes  one  of  the  ugli- 
est features  of  English  politics.  Constituencies, 
particularly  if  they  are  poor,  like  to  be  "nursed," 
and  the  candidate  often  does  not  hesitate  on  the  eve 
of  election  to  remind  the  recipients  of  his  charity  of 
their  obligation  to  remember  him  in  return.  The 
consequence  is  a  decided  tendency  to  flunkeyism, 
mild  general  corruption,  and  the  deterioration  of 
manly  independence.  The  preference  for  rich  re- 
presentatives is  doubtless  as  much  due  to  this  seduc- 
tive influence  as  to  the  respect  for  rank  in  itself. 

The  pervading  influence  of  money  and  social 
prestige  in  England  makes  the  son  of  a  nobleman,  if 
possessed  of  capable  and  amiable  character,  always 
a  strong  candidate.  The  labouring  classes  themselves 
generally  prefer  such  a  representative,  and  indeed  it 
is  said  that  a  workingman  of  political  ambitions  is 
likely  to  find  his  greatest  difficulty  in  winning  over 
the  opposition  in  his  own  class. 

Relative  Democracy  of  the  English  and  American 
Systems.  Facts  like  these  should  be  kept  in  mind 
in  considering  the  extent  to  which  the  English  govern- 


Elections  to  Parliament  219 

ment  is  genuinely  democratic.  The  method  of  legis- 
lation, the  holding  of  the  government  to  absolute  and 
immediate  responsibility  through  Parliament,  and 
the  fact  of  the  Ministry's  being  subject  to  prompt  dis- 
missal by  the  voters,  with  the  consequent  keeping  of 
both  executive  and  legislature  in  full  accord  with  the 
people,  would  appear  the  most  perfect  means  of 
making  the  rulers  responsive  to  the  will  of  the  major- 
ity that  can  be  found  in  any  national  government, 
with  the  possible  exception  of  Switzerland  with  its 
initiative  and  referendum.  But  against  this  must 
be  weighed  the  powerful  and  subtle  influence  of 
money  and  class  distinction.  Even  if  the  election 
expenses  were  reduced,  it  is  a  question  whether,  with 
the  small  salary  of  £400,  any  but  rich  men  could  as  a 
rule  afford  to  stand  as  candidates  for  a  body  whose 
members  must  take  their  seats  immediately  after 
election  without  several  months'  notice,  as  in  the 
United  States,  to  adjust  their  business  affairs,  and  are 
liable  at  any  moment  to  lose  their  places  without 
having  time  to  plan  private  means  of  earning  a 
livelihood.  While  the  American  system  of  having 
elections  at  stated  periods  and  allowing  several 
months,  generally  over  a  year,  to  elapse  between  the 
election  and  the  seating  of  the  new  members  fur- 
nishes no  such  effective  means  of  putting  the  will  of 
the  people  promptly  into  effect,  it  makes  it  much 
easier  for  the  man  of  moderate  means  to  seek  the 


220  Politics  and  Elections 

position.  The  American  plan  is  more  democratic 
in  the  personnel  of  candidates;  the  English,  in  the 
execution  of  the  immediate  popular  will. 

Election  Expenses.  The  candidate  bears  not  only 
the  expenses  of  his  campaign,  but  also  the  expenses 
of  holding  the  election.  Though  so  contrary  to  the 
principles  of  democracy  as  to  be  much  condemned 
even  in  England,  virtually  the  same  practice  exists 
in  some  American  States  by  assessing  the  candidates 
a  large  entrance  fee  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the 
expenses  of  the  party  primaries.  It  is  to  be  doubted 
whether  the  well-to-do  men  in  both  countries  who  are 
so  often  candidates  would  desire  to  see  this  bar 
against  poorer  competitors  removed. 

Comparative  Purity  of  English  Politics.  A  few 
generations  ago  English  politics  were  shamefully 
corrupt,  so  much  so  that  bribery  offices  were  openly 
kept  for  buying  members  of  Parliament,  and  public 
criers  sometimes  went  through  the  streets  after  the 
election  notifying  all  the  voters  for  such  and  such  a 
candidate  to  go  to  a  certain  place  for  their  pay.  The 
steady  improvement  in  public  sentiment  has  now 
made  English  politics  the  least  tainted  by  the 
grosser  forms  of  corruption  of  those  of  any  large 
democratic  country  in  the  world. 

Corrupt  Practices  Act.  The  law  rigidly  prescribes 
the  amount  a  candidate  may  spend.  More  impor- 
tant than  this,  however,  it  also  requires  him  to  appoint 


Elections  to  Parliament  221 

an  election  Agent  to  conduct  his  campaign,  for  whose 
acts  the  candidate  and  the  Agent  himself  are  both 
responsible.  The  things  which  may  be  done  are 
named  and  also  those  which  may  not  be  done.  It  is 
a  punishable  offence  for  any  one  to  promise  or  seek 
to  secure  any  position  or  employment  for  a  person  in 
return  for  votes,  to  treat  to  drinks,  food,  etc.,  or  to 
withdraw  patronage  from  a  tradesman  on  account  of 
his  vote.  Any  illegal  act  by  the  Agent  or  candidate, 
or  by  any  one  else  with  the  candidate's  knowledge  and 
consent,  makes  his  election  invalid  and  renders  him 
for  ever  incapable  of  sitting  in  Parliament  for  that 
district.  Any  corrupt  act  by  the  Agent  without  the 
candidate's  knowledge  makes  his  election  void  and 
renders  him  incapable  of  sitting  for  that  district  for 
seven  years*  Moreover,  if  corruption  or  intimida- 
tion be  very  general  without  any  misconduct  on  the 
part  of  the  candidate  or  his  Agent,  the  election  may 
be  declared  void  and  a  new  one  ordered.  The  guilty 
persons  are  also  subject  to  fine  and  imprisonment. 
The  law  against  corruption  is  enforced  by  a  special 
court. x 

These  excellent  laws  have  greatly  reduced  corrup- 
tion in  elections ;  but  there  is  still  some  which  can  be 
eliminated  only  by  the  further  purification  of  public 
opinion. 

Election  by  Plurality.    The  candidate  is  successful 

1  Lowell,  L,  223-34. 


222  Politics  and  Elections 

who  receives  more  votes  than  any  other  candidate 
(a  plurality,  as  it  is  called),  and  is  not  obliged  to 
receive  a  majority,  i.  e.  more  than  half  the  votes  cast 
for  all  candidates,  which  is  the  same  as  to  say  more 
votes  for  him  than  all  the  other  candidates  .together 
receive.  This  is  the  law  of  elections  generally  in  the 
United  States,  although  in  party  primaries  the  rule 
sometimes  requires  an  absolute  majority  to  win  the 
party  nomination.  Although  it  might  theoretically 
be  more  democratic  to  require  a  majority,  the  prac- 
tical results  are  such  as  to  make  it  doubtful  which 
system  would  be  better  in  the  long  run. 

It  is  the  rule  in  England,  both  in  elections  for 
Parliament  and  in  those  for  members  of  local  bodies, 
that  if  there  is  only  one  candidate,  he  is  declared 
elected  without  the  expense  and  trouble  of  taking  a 
vote. 

Relations  of  the  Member  to  his  District.  The 
member  of  Parliament  is  supposed  to  represent  the 
entire  Empire,  and  the  idea  of  his  being  sent  to  get 
whatever  special  advantages  he  can  for  his  district, 
unfortunately  so  strong  in  the  United  States,  is 
almost  non-existent.  The  smallness  of  the  country, 
the  absence  of  the  spoils  system  of  distributing  ap- 
pointments, the  great  importance  of  sending  a  man 
who  will  support  the  Ministry  loyally,  and  the  ad- 
vantage of  having  a  rich  and  generous  candidate,  all 
help  to  account  for  the  absence  of  any  decided  pre- 


Elections  to  Parliament  223 

ference  for  having  a  member  live  in  the  district  from 
which  he  is  elected.  Hence  about  half  the  members 
of  the  House  of  Commons  do  not  live  in  their  districts. 
The  member,  however,  keeps  in  close  touch  with  his 
constituents  and  is  sometimes  induced  even  to  resign 
by  their  dissatisfaction  expressed  through  the  dis- 
trict party  organization.  A  good  custom  is  that  of 
the  member's  once  a  year  making  an  extended  speech 
to  the  voters,  giving  them  a  full  account  of  the  prin- 
cipal matters  of  public  interest. 

The  Morals  of  Free  Institutions.  In  leaving  the 
subject  of  elections,  ministerial  responsibility,  cus- 
toms of  the  constitution,  the  honourable  and  uncom- 
pelled  observance  of  conventions  and  understandings, 
and  the  whole  machinery  of  parliamentary  self-gov- 
ernment, it  is  with  the  conviction  that  such  a  system 
has  a  profound  influence  over  a  government's  conduct 
even  in  foreign  relations  and  war,  and  on  the  other 
hand  that  "the  long  practice  of  autocratic  principles 
breeds  intolerance  towards  opposition  and  violence 
towards  whoever  resists  the  will  of  such  a  govern- 
ment. Absolutism  not  only  considers  itself  not  bound 
by  the  sacred  rights  of  other  men  and  nations,  but  it 
cannot  understand  why  it  should  be  blamed  for  re- 
fusing to  consider  such  obligations.  In  other  words, 
free  institutions  are  liberalizing  and  despotic  institu- 
tions are  brutalizing. 


BOOK  II 
Local  Government 


is  225 


BOOK  H.    LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

CHAPTER  XXI 

CITY  GOVERNMENT 

Local  Government  in  England  Subject  to  the  Cen- 
tral Government.  We  must  keep  in  mind  the  dis- 
tinction between  a  federal  system,  like  that  of  the 
United  States,  where  the  powers  of  government  are 
distributed  between  the  federal  government  and 
the  States,  each  in  its  own  sphere  entirely  independ- 
ent of  any  control  by  the  other,  and  a  centralized 
government,  like  that  of  England,  in  which  all  au- 
thority is  vested  in  Parliament.  In  the  United  States 
control  of  the  whole  domain  of  criminal  and  civil  law, 
including  all  matters  of  contract,  marriage,  divorce, 
education,  the  general  relations  of  business  and  every- 
day life,  and  the  qualifications  for  voting,  even  in 
national  elections  (with  the  exception  that  they  can- 
not disfranchise  a  person  on  account  of  race)  are  in 
the  control  of  the  State;  and  the  States  and  their 
internal  subdivisions  are  entirely  beyond  the  control 

227 


228  Local  Government 

or  supervision  of  Congress.  In  England  on  the  con- 
trary, not  only  are  all  laws,  except  mere  municipal 
or  county  regulations,  made  by  the  national  author- 
ity, but  the  very  existence  of  every  form  and  division 
of  local  government  depends  upon  the  will  of  Parlia- 
ment, and  their  limited  powers  are  conferred  by  that 
body. 

Another  and  new  consideration  we  must  keep  in 
mind :  In  describing  the  system  of  parliamentary  and 
cabinet  government,  we  have  noted  the  resemblances 
and  contrasts  to  the  American  national  government. 
The  viewpoint  now  changes,  and  we  find  that  the 
helpful  parallel  is  between  the  powers,  functions, 
and  relations  of  Parliament  and  English  local  govern- 
ing bodies  on  the  one  side  and  the  powers,  functions, 
and  relations  of  the  American  State  government  and 
American  county  and  city  governments  on  the  other. 
The  immediate  superior  of  the  local  government 
division  in  England  is  the  government  in  London; 
and  by  a  proper  correlation  of  the  functions  of  the 
two,  great  improvement  has  been  accomplished. 
The  immediate  superior  of  the  local  government  di- 
vision in  the  United  States  is  the  State  government, 
and  a  study  of  what  has  been  done  in  England  sug- 
gests that  by  a  proper  extension  of  the  unifying,  co- 
ordinating, and  regulating  authority  of  the  latter 
great  improvement  is  possible  in  that  part  of  our 
system  which  most  needs  improvement. 


City  Government 


229 


A  Land  of  Cities.  There  are  two  general  divisions 
of  local  government,  city  and  country,  or  urban  and 
rural.  We  shall  describe  the  forms  of  city  government 
first,  because  among  the  more  important  existing 
forms  of  local  government  in  England  they  were 
created  first  and  served  as  a  model  for  the  others. 
City  government  is  of  unusual  importance  in  Eng- 
land, because  about  eighty  per  cent,  of  the  population 
live  in  large  towns  and  cities;  and  the  proportion  is 
increasing  as  England  becomes  more  and  more  a 
manufacturing  country. 

In  1835  the  corrupt  and  inefficient  city  govern- 
ments dating  from  the  middle  ages  were  abolished 
and  the  present  excellent  system  created. 

Definition  of  Terms.  The  word  city  in  England 
formerly  meant  a  place  which  was  the  residence 
of  a  bishop  of  the  established  church,  whether  large 
or  small;  but  this  is  no  longer  the  case  and  the  word 
now  means  simply  any  large  municipality.  The 
word  borough  is  the  word  usually  employed  in  Eng- 
lish law  to  describe  an  incorporated  town  or  city, 
and  it  is  the  word  we  shall  generally  use  for  that  pur- 
pose. 

Boroughs  with  Incomplete  Municipal  Powers. 
Boroughs  are  of  three  classes,  varying  in  the  extent 
of  their  powers  of  self-government  according  to  their 
size,  though  the  form  of  government  of  each  is  much 
the  same.  First,  there  are  boroughs  of  ten  thousand 


230  Local  Government 

inhabitants  or  less,  which  are  subject  in  some  matters 
of  municipal  government  to  the  government  of  the 
county  in  which  they  lie.  Such  boroughs  elect 
representatives  to  the  governing  body  of  the  county 
to  be  later  described. 

Boroughs  with  Full  Municipal  Powers.  The 
second  class  of  boroughs  are  those  with  a  population 
of  over  ten  thousand  and  under  fifty  thousand. 
They  possess  the  full  powers  usually  belonging  to  a 
self-governing  city,  differing  in  this  from  the  smaller 
boroughs,  some  of  whose  municipal  officers  are  under 
the  control  of  the  county.  These  larger  boroughs, 
however,  form  a  part  of  a  county  and  elect  representa- 
tives to  its  government. 

County  Boroughs.  The  third  class  of  boroughs  are 
those  of  fifty  thousand  inhabitants  or  over.  They 
are  called  county  boroughs  for  the  reason  that  they 
have  all  the  powers  of  a  county  in  addition  to  those 
of  an  ordinary  borough;  i.  e.  they  have  their  own 
quarter  sessions,  etc.,  and  their  borough  government 
discharges  in  addition  to  its  functions  as  a  city  govern- 
ment also  all  those  of  a  county  government.  Hence 
the  county  borough  takes  no  part  in  the  government 
of  the  county  by  which  it  is  geographically  surrounded 
and  is  not  subject  to  that  government.1 

1 A  few  cities  having  at  the  time  fewer  than  50,000  inhabitants 
were  allowed  the  privileges  of  county  boroughs,  and  some  that  have 
since  grown  beyond  that  size  have  chosen  not  to  become  county 
boroughs. 


City  Government  231 

Urban  Districts.  Small  towns  are  usually  organ- 
ized as  urban  districts  instead  of  boroughs.  As  they 
are  subordinate  divisions  of  a  county,  they  will  be 
treated  in  the  next  chapter,  though  some  of  them 
contain  a  sufficient  "population  to  make  them  small 
cities  in  their  circumstances,  needs,  and  problems. 

The  Borough  Council.  A  borough  is  governed  by 
a  Council,  consisting  of  one  chamber.  The  English 
do  not  use  the  system  of  a  two-chambered  govern- 
ment for  their  very  large  cities,  as  some  American 
cities  still  do  (though  it  is  being  abandoned  in  this 
country  as  unsatisfactory);  nor  do  they  confer  any 
executive  powers  upon  the  Mayor.  The  government 
is  thus  in  the  complete  control  of  the  one-chambered 
body  called  the  Borough  Council  having  charge  of 
all  the  functions  of  the  government  of  the  city,  except 
the  courts.  This  Council  consists  of  two  classes  of 
members — councilmen  and  aldermen.  They  have 
the  same  power  and  form  together  one  body,  but  differ 
in  their  election  and  terms  of  office. 

The  Councilmen.  The  Councilmen  are  elected  by 
the  qualified  voters  of  the  city  by  wards,  for  a  term 
of  three  years.  Usually  each  ward  selects  three,  a 
third  of  them  from  each  ward  being  elected  each  year. 
Thus  two  thirds  of  the  existing  councilmen  are  always 
old  members  and  it  is  impossible,  except  in  the  few 
cities  that  elect  all  at  once,  to  make  a  clean  sweep  of 
the  old  Council.  To  do  so  is  not  often  desirable,  as 


232  Local  Government 

corruption  is  uncommon,  and  the  elections  rarely 
turn  on  questions  of  party  politics.  The  govern- 
ment of  a  city  is  largely  a  matter  of  experienced  busi- 
ness administration  in  which  the  chief  requirements 
are  efficiency  and  honesty. 

It  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  commission  form  of 
government  for  cities  which  is  becoming  so  popular 
in  the  United  States  often  adopts  the  plan  of  electing 
a  third,  or  other  fraction,  of  the  councilmen  annually. 

Numbers  and  Residence  of  Councilmen.  The 
councilmen  vary  from  nine  in  small  boroughs  to  a 
little  over  a  hundred  in  very  large  ones.  As  with 
members  of  Parliament,  neither  law  nor  custom  re- 
quires the  councilman  to  live  in  the  ward  by  which 
he  is  elected.  It  is  not  uncommon  for  a  working- 
man's  ward  to  elect  some  wealthy  citizen  from  an- 
other quarter  of  the  city  whose  character  and  ability 
they  trust. 

Election  of  Aldermen.  The  number  of  aldermen 
on  the  Council  is  one  third  that  of  the  councilmen. 
They  are  chosen  .by  the  Council  for  a  term  of  six 
years,  one  half  being  elected  every  three  years. 
At  the  election  of  new  aldermen,  the  hold-over  al- 
dermen vote  just  as  do  the  councilmen.  It  is  evident 
that  this  arrangement  would  sometimes  make  it 
possible  for  the  party  in  the  Council  that  had  been 
repudiated  by  the  people  at  the  recent  election  of  the 
annually  elected  one  third  of  the  councilmen  to 


City  Government  233 

prevent  the  party  thus  receiving  the  popular  approval 
from  securing  control  of  a  closely  divided  Council  by 
electing  as  the  new  aldermen  men  of  the  repudiated 
party.  This  has  occasionally  occurred1;  but  there 
are  several  reasons  why  it  constitutes  a  slight  danger, 
as  will  presently  appear,  besides  the  fact  that  party 
politics  do  not  enter  largely  into  English  municipal 
government. 

Importance  of  the  Aldermen.  The  aldermen  may 
be  elected  either  from  the  Council  itself  or  from  the 
general  citizenship,  and  are  chosen  without  reference 
to  wards.  As  a  matter  of  fact  it  is  customary  to 
elect  councilmen  who  have  proved  their  efficiency 
and  public  spirit;  and  the  alderman  is  generally  re- 
elected  for  many  terms.  It  is  not  uncommon  to 
find  instances  of  continuous  service  for  twenty -five 
years.  The  aldermen,  moreover,  possess  greater  in- 
fluence upon  the  Council  than  their  fellow-members 
• — an  influence  won  by  ability,  character,  and  long 
service — and  are  practically  always  the  chairmen  of 
the  most  important  committees.  They  are  thus  a 
sort  of  permanent  core  which  gives  continuity  to  the 
management  of  public  business. 

The  place  of  a  councilman  who  has  been  promoted 
to  alderman  is  immediately  filled  by  an  election  in  his 
ward.  Neither  councilmen  nor  aldermen  receive  any 
salary. 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  157-8. 


234  Local  Government 

The  Mayor.  The  Council  chooses  annually,  and 
practically  always  from  its  own  membership,  a 
Mayor.  He  is  little  more  than  the  representative  of 
the  city  upon  ceremonial  occasions.  He  has  no 
executive  authority  and  continues  to  be  a  regular 
member  of  the  Council  with  the  same  duties  in  its 
business  as  before.  His  office  gives  him  the  powers 
of  a  justice  of  the  peace;  but  in  a  large  place  his  time 
is  so  taken  up  with  formal  and  social  duties  that  he 
is  very  much  withdrawn  from  any  participation  in 
the  government. 

Salary,  Social  Duties,  etc.,  of  the  Mayor.  In  some 
places  the  Mayor  receives  a  small  salary,  but  the 
expenses  of  entertainment  and  display  are  so  great, 
reaching  perhaps  in  a  great  city  £5000  annually,  that 
few  men  would  be  willing  to  hold  the  office  more  than 
one  year.  For  this  reason  a  rich  man  outside  the 
city,  or  even  a  neighbouring  peer, 'is  sometimes  chosen. 
The  honour  is  highly  esteemed,  and  if  good  fortune 
brings  a  formal  visit  from  the  sovereign  to  the  city, 
the  Mayor  is  made  a  knight. x 

Committees.  The  Council  divides  itself  into  com- 
mittees for  attending  to  the  various  branches  of  the 
city's  business.  As  remarked  above,  the  chairman  of 
a  committee  is  usually  an  alderman.  The  chairman 
and  committee  remain  the  same  year  after  year,  only 
such  changes  being  made  as  vacancies,  etc.,  require. 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  162. 


City  Government  235 

Permanent  Experts.  Each  branch  of  city  business 
is  in  direct  charge  of  a  permanent  and  trained  special- 
ist who  is  elected  by  the  Council,  usually  upon  the 
recommendation  of  the  committee  over  that  depart- 
ment. Thus  there  are  engineers  over  streets, 
drainage,  sewerage,  etc.,  health  officers,  school  super- 
intendents, electricians,  chemists,  trained  officers  of 
police.  These  positions  are  filled  with  entire  disre- 
gard of  whether  the  applicants  are  from  the  city  or 
from  hundreds  of  miles  away,  just  as  in  the  United 
States  in  selecting  a  superintendent  of  city  schools. 
The  various  branches  of  city  business  thus  become 
trained  professions  which  young  men  adopt  as  they 
would  law  or  medicine,  and  the  Borough  Council 
seeks  to  secure  the  best  services  for  the  citizens  with- 
out reference  to  the  applicant's  politics  or  residence. T 

The  Civil  Service  as  a  Profession.  A  successful 
administrator  is  called  from  a  small  city  to  a  large 
one  just  as  in  any  other  business  or  profession.  In 
other  words,  the  people  of  England  do  not  imagine 
that  public  office  is  a  private  cinch  for  that  small 

1  The  author  has  known  the  water  commissioners  of  a  so-called 
progressive  city  in  the  United  States  to  require  an  employee  to  break 
up  his  home  just  outside  the  city  limits  and  move  inside  because 
some  enlightened  voters  objected  to  an  "outsider"  holding  the  job. 
What  benefit  the  citizens  received  by  the  serious  inconvenience  thus 
forced  upon  their  servant  never  appeared;  for  in  a  year  or  two  he 
was  allowed  to  move  back  into  the  suburb.  Probably  they  felt  that 
they  had  maintained  a  valuable  principle  and  also  enjoyed  thereby 
a  greater  degree  of  security  against  the  despotism  of  some  foreign 
tyrant. 


236  Local  Government 

fraction  of  the  population  who  chance  to  seek  it,  nor 
that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  Birmingham  electricity 
or  Leeds  bacteriology  or  Conservative  or  Liberal 
mathematics  and  physics  for  the  construction  of 
pavements. 

The  Town  Clerk.  One  of  the  most  important  of 
the  permanent  skilled  officials  is  the  Town  Clerk. 
He  is  a  lawyer  and  is  supposed  to  be  a  man  of  admin- 
istrative talent.  He  not  only  gives  legal  advice  to 
the  Council  as  a  whole  or  to  any  of  its  committees, 
but  exercises  also  a  general  oversight  of  the  details 
of  the  city's  affairs. 

The  influence  of  the  various  professional  experts 
with  their  respective  committees  on  affairs  under 
their  care,  and  of  the  Town  Clerk  on  the  whole 
Council  in  matters  of  general  policy,  is  very  strong. 
When  the  recommendations  of  the  departmental 
experts  have  been  amended  and  approved  by  the 
common  sense  and  general  knowledge  of  affairs  of 
their  committees,  the  Council  naturally  can  rarely  be 
induced  to  disregard  them  to  any  considerable  extent. 

Borough  Suffrage.  The  right  to  vote  for  members 
of  Borough  Councils  differs  somewhat  from  that  for 
members  of  Parliament.  The  voter  must  have  oc- 
cupied any  house1  in  the  borough  for  residence  or 


1  "House"  means  any  separate  part  of  a  building  rented  or  owned 
on  terms  that  make  the  occupier  the  head  of  a  separate  household, 
shop,  or  office. 


City  Government  237 

business,  of  any  value  whatever,  or  land  of  an  annual 
rental  value  of  £10,  and  must  have  lived  for  one 
year  previous  to  July  I5th  in  the  borough  or  within 
seven  miles  of  it.  No  mere  lodger1  may  vote,  how- 
ever. Widows  or  unmarried  women  may  vote  on 
the  same  qualifications  as  men. 

The  suffrage  is  extended  to  residents  within  seven 
miles  who  occupy  houses  or  lands  in  the  borough. 
This  is  on  account  of  the  large  number  of  persons 
whose  business  is  in  the  city  but  who  live  outside. 
Though  this  rule  might  give  a  few  persons  a  right  to 
vote  who  have  slight  interest  in  the  city's  affairs, 
to  exclude  these  suburban  dwellers  would  cut  off 
many  people  having  a  high  interest  in  the  city's  good 
government  and  business  prosperity. 

Women  on  Councils.  Women  may  not  only  vote, 
with  certain  limitations,2  for  members  of  any  local 
government  Council,  of  either  the  borough,  the 
county,  or  any  smaller  subdivision,  but  they  may 
also  be  elected  members  of  any  of  these  Councils.3 

The  Borough  Charter.  Borough  government  is 
not  forced  upon  a  place,  nor  are  two  towns  which 
have  spread  until  they  run  into  each  other  forced 
to  unite  under  one  Council.  If,  on  account  of  local 

1  A  lodger  rents  a  room  or  rooms  from  some  person  who,  whether 
tenant  or  owner,  is  the  head  of  that  household. 

2  See  pages  237,  246,  250,  and  260-1. 

3  Of  the  Borough  and  County  Councils  only  since  1907;  of  the 
lower  Councils  for  many  years.     Wilson,  420;  Lowell.,  ii.,  211. 


238  Local  Government 

pride  or  fear  of  expenses  of  heavy  taxation,  the  citi- 
zens of  a  region  whose  density  of  population  really 
makes  it  a  city  wish  to  continue  to  manage  their 
affairs  simply  as  an  "urban  district "  under  the  super- 
vision of  the  county  government,  or  to  remain  a 
separate  borough  from  the  city  which  is  spreading 
around  them,  they  may  follow  their  own  preferences. 
A  charter  creating  a  place  a  borough  or  merging  it 
with  another  borough  may  be  obtained  from  the 
proper  authority  of  the  central  government  in  Lon- 
don.1 

Central  Control.  The  central  government  con- 
tributes to  the  expenses  of  all  local  governments 
about  one  fourth  of  their  total  amount.2  This  is 
chiefly  because  Parliament  controls  many  of  the 
sources  of  taxation  that  in  the  United  States  are  left 
in  the  hands  of  the  State  legislatures  or  local  bodies. 
All  bonds  for  the  borrowing  of  money  by  any  local 
government  must  be  submitted  to  a  department  of 
the  central  government  having  supervision  of  local 
government.  Also  the  by-laws,  or  ordinances,  of 
Borough  Councils  and  all  other  local  governments  on 
a  number  of  important  subjects  must  be  submitted 
for  approval  to  the  Home  Secretary  or  the  Local 
Government  Board,  by  whom  they  may  be  vetoed.3 
This  answers  in  a  way  to  the  constitutional  limita- 

T  Lowell,  ii.,  145-6.  'Ibid.,  ii.,  190. 

*Ibid.t  ii.,  287-94;  Wilson,  412. 


City  Government  239 

tions  under  which  all  local  governments  rest  in  the 
United  States. 

In  few  if  any  States  have  we  worked  out  satisfac- 
torily the  problem  of  how  the  city  shall  be  allowed  a 
free  hand  in  those  matters  properly  falling  within 
a  reasonable  definition  of  " municipal  home  rule"  and 
at  the  same  time  be  protected  by  the  supervisory 
power  of  the  State  from  injuries  to  its  own  interests 
by  sinister  influences  within  itself,  restrained  from 
trespassing  upon  interests  outside  the  city,  and 
brought  to  do  its  part  in  the  maintenance  of  the  com- 
monwealth's general  system  of  law  and  order.  The 
common  plan  of  rigid  constitutional  restrictions,  with 
great  powers  of  arbitrary  interference  by  the  State 
legislature,  has  not  worked  well.  Benefit  might  be 
derived  from  some  more  flexible  system  something 
like  the  English,  of  an  advisory  and  supervisory  State 
department  better  qualified  to  adjust  the  general  and 
local  interests  equitably  in  particular  cases. 

Absence  of  "Politics"  in  English  City  Govern- 
ment. Politics  is  a  word  frequently  carrying  an 
unsavoury  suggestion,  because  politics  are  so  often 
brought  into  affairs  in  which  they  can  only  do  harm. 
Politics  as  expressing  the  organized  efforts  of  masses 
of  men  to  secure  the  control  of  the  government  in 
order  to  enforce  a  certain  set  of  principles  instead 
of  another  are  a  proper  and  necessary  feature  of  the 
life  of  a  free  people;  but  politics  in  the  sense  of  seeking 


240  Local  Government 

positions  for  the  salaries  or  other  profits  coming  to 
those  who  hold  the  offices  are  necessarily  bad  and 
most  likely  corrupt. 

City  government  is  mainly  a  matter  of  honesty, 
efficiency,  and  business  management.  Hence  to 
introduce  "polities'*  is  to  substitute  dishonesty, 
inefficiency,  and  mismanagement.  From  politics  in 
this  sense  city  government  in  England  is  almost 
entirely  free. 

Party  Divisions  in  Municipal  Elections.  Holding 
city  and  parliamentary  (i.  e.  national)  elections  at 
different  times  tends  to  keep  city  elections  free  from 
the  influence  of  national  politics  and  to  leave  voters 
free  to  vote  for  the  best  men  instead  of  feeling  bound 
to  support  their  party's  nominees  for  councilmen. 
The  names  of  the  two  national  parties  are  therefore 
not  generally  used  in  local  elections,  but  are  replaced 
by  the  names  Progressive  and  Moderate. 

The  Progressives  favor  the  extension  of  the  city's 
activity  in  such  lines  as  municipal  ownership  of  gas 
and  electric  works,  street  railways,  lodging  houses 
for  the  poor,  etc.,  while  the  Moderates  generally 
oppose  the  further  extension  of  these  activities  by 
the  city  or  urge  more  conservative  plans.  The  Pro- 
gressives are  naturally  mostly  Liberals  in  national 
politics  and  the  Moderates  Conservatives,  though 
this  is  not  always  the  case.  National  party  feeling 
enters  comparatively  little  into  municipal  elections 


City  Government  241 

and  still  less  into  the  choice  of  permanent  officials  by 
the  Council.  In  the  regular  work  of  the  committees 
and  Council  and  the  question  of  retaining  permanent 
officials,  politics  do  not  enter  at  all.  In  some  bor- 
oughs lines  are  not  drawn  on  the  candidates  even  as 
Progressives  and  Moderates,  thus  eliminating  party 
politics  entirely. J 

Efficiency  and  Purity  of  English  Municipal  Govern- 
ment. To  quote  the  opinion  of  one  of  the  best  in- 
formed authorities,  Prof.  A.  Lawrence  Lowell,  English 
city  government  is  notably  pure  and  efficient,  though 
not  brilliant.  Corruption  is  of  course  occasionally 
found,  and  in  some  cases  has  been  quite  bad. 

The  prevalent  efficiency  and  purity  seem  to  be 
due  largely  to  four  causes  : 

First,  the  short  ballot.  With  a  few  trifling  excep- 
tions, the  voters  choose  only  the  councilmen  and 
hence  can  know  the  character  and  history  of  the 
candidates.  This  is  impossible  where  dozens  of 
officers  are  to  be  voted  for,  and  hence  even  the  intel- 
ligent voter  is  obliged  to  vote  on  somebody's  advice 
or  blindly  vote  the  straight  party  ticket,  which  prob- 
ably contains  some  very  crooked  individuals. 

Second,  the  absence  of  the  spoils  system.  As  all 
employees  of  the  city  are  chosen  on  merit  as  deter- 
mined by  examination  as  described  above  on  pages 
158  and  following,  and  hold  their  positions  in  the 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  152-3, 158. 
16 


242  Local  Government 

same  way  as  the  employees  of  a  bank  or  factory,  i.  e. 
so  long  as  they  deserve  them,  there  is  no  corrupting 
influence  of  personal  gain  to  interest  the  grafting 
politician  or  to  tempt  him  to  organize  the  voters. 

Third,  the  permanent  tenure  of  city  employees. 
The  influence  on  efficiency  of  employing  expert  officials 
purely  because  of  their  character  and  skill  and  retain- 
ing them  so  long  as  they  perform  their  duties  satis- 
factorily has  already  been  explained  on  page  235. 

Fourth,  the  re-electing  of  competent  councilmen, 
and  especially  aldermen.  We  have  already  seen 
how  this  places  the  administration  of  the  city  in  the 
hands  of  those  best  "qualified.  It  leads  many  men  of 
especial  value  to  the  public  to  offer  as  candidates  who 
would  not  consent  to  undergo  the  annual  or  biennial 
recurrence  of  a  violent  campaign  in  which  character 
and  motives  are  assailed  with  slander  and  insults. 
Hence  a  very  high  class  of  citizen  makes  the  service 
of  the  city  his  chief  concern  who  otherwise  could 
rarely  be  induced  to  do  more  than  vote. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

COUNTY  GOVERNMENT 

Nature  of  the  English  County.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  government  of  the  United  States  like  the 
English  county,  just  as  there  is  nothing  in  England 
answering  to  the  American  State.  The  county  is 
the  largest  self-governing  division  in  England,  just 
as  our  State  is  the  largest  self-governing  area  below 
the  federal  government;  but  here  the  resemblance 
ceases.  The  rights  and  powers  of  the  States  are 
protected  in  the  United  States  Constitution  and  the 
States  are  the  framework  upon  which  the  national 
government  is  built ;  but  the  county  governments  in 
England  are  the  recent  creation  of  Parliament  and 
are  not  in  any  sense  the  foundations  upon  which  the 
national  government  rests,  and  can  at  any  time  be 
legally  destroyed  by  mere  act  of  Parliament.  This 
is  only  another  way  of  saying  that  ours  is  a  federal 
government,  made  up  at  first  of  previously  existing 
States  which  retain  large  powers  of  their  own, 
while  England  is  a  consolidated,  or  centralized,  na- 
tion with  all  authority  in  the  central  government. 

243 


244  Local  Government 

Local  Government  Divisions.  There  are  in  Eng- 
land the  following  kinds  of  local  government  besides 
the  boroughs;  Counties,  urban  districts,  rural  dis- 
tricts, parishes,  and  poor  law  unions.  In  this  chap- 
ter we  shall  describe  the  county  government  system. 

Origin  of  the  Present  System.  The  old  system 
of  county  government  by  the  justices  of  the  peace 
was  displaced  by  the  present  plan  in  1888.  The  new 
system  was  modelled  on  the  borough  governments 
which  had  been  created  in  1835,  and  hence  will  not 
require  such  detailed  description  as  we  have  given 
those  in  the  preceding  chapter. 

Administrative  Counties.  Some  of  the  ancient 
counties  were  too  large  for  convenient  administration, 
and  hence  they  were  subdivided.  Even  where  not 
too  large,  the  ancient  outlines  were  often  unsuitable, 
and  accordingly  the  boundaries  of  the  respective 
areas  for  the  new  county  governments  were  made 
without  strict  regard  to  them.  In  fact  in  only  about 
a  half-dozen  cases  are  their  bounds  the  same. 

An  area  having  its  own  county  government  is 
called  an  administrative  county,  to  distinguish  it 
from  the  ancient  historic  counties,  or  counties  at 
large  as  they  are  now  commonly  designated.  There 
are  in  England  and  Wales  fifty-two  of  the  ancient 
counties  at  large,  but  sixty- two  of  the  new  adminis- 
trative counties. * 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  141,  n.  I. 


County  Government  245 

The  administrative  counties  differ  in  population 
from  about  20,000  to  about  2,000,000,  not  to  speak 
of  the  administrative  county  of  London  with  over 
4,500,000.  The  ancient  counties  have  no  governing 
bodies  and  are  now  used  for  only  a  few  purposes ;  but 
they  still  retain  in  many  instances  an  important 
significance  in  social  and  family  life  and  much  of 
their  historic  individuality. 

The  County  Council.  The  government  of  an  ad- 
ministrative county  (or,  as  we  shall  say  for  short,  of  a 
county)  consists  of  an  elected  County  Council.  The 
term  is  three  years,  and  the  members  are  all  elected  at 
the  same  time,  one  for  each  of  the  wards  into  which  the 
county  is  divided  for  this  purpose.  Representatives 
are  elected  from  every  city,  town,  and  rural  section 
within  the  county,  except  county  boroughs,  whose 
Councils,  as  related  in  the  preceding  chapter,  exercise 
within  their  bounds  the  powers  of  a  county  as  well 
as  city  government,  and  which  stand  accordingly 
entirely  apart  from  the  counties  by  which  they  are 
surrounded. 

The  councilmen,  as  in  the  boroughs,  elect  a  number 
of  aldermen  equal  to  one  third  of  their  own  number, 
but  unlike  the  boroughs,  the  existing  aldermen  can- 
not vote  for  the  new  aldermen.  The  aldermen  are 
elected  without  regard  to  wards,  and  may  come 
either  from  the  council  or  from  outside.  Their  term 
is  six  years,  one  half  going  out  every  three  years. 


246  Local  Government 

The    Chairman    of    the    County    Council.    The 

County  Council  elects  a  Chairman.  Unlike  the 
borough  Mayor,  however,  he  has  few  social  duties, 
but  is  an  effective  part  of  the  working  machinery  of 
the  government.  He  is  not  the  head  of  an  executive 
department,  but  remains  simply  a  member  and  pre- 
siding officer  of  the  Council;  but  he  is  customarily 
re-elected  year  after  year  and  comes  to  be  the  most 
influential  person  in  the  government  of  the  county. 

County  Suffrage.  The  qualifications  for  voting 
for  members  of  the  County  Council  are  the  same  as 
for  voting  for  councilmen  in  the  boroughs,  i.  e.  the 
occupation  for  any  purpose  of  any  building  in  the 
county  for  a  year  previous  to  July  I5th,  or  of  land  for 
the  same  period  of  £10  value,  and  residence  during 
the  same  period  within  the  county  or  within  seven 
miles  of  it.  Mere  lodgers  cannot  vote.  Women 
without  husbands  may  vote  on  the  same  qualifica- 
tions as  men. 

Authority  of  the  County  Council.  No  greater 
mistake  could  be  made  than  to  suppose  that  the 
English  County  Council  possesses  an  authority 
similar  to  that  of  the  legislature  of  an  American 
State.  The  great  majority  of  the  powers  of  an 
American  State  are  exercised  in  England  by  Parlia- 
ment. As  already  remarked,  in  comparing  local 
government  in  England  and  our  own  country,  the 
analogy  to  be  kept  in  mind  is  that  between  the  govern- 


County  Government  247 

ment  in  London  and  that  in  the  American  State 
capital  in  their  relations  to  local  governmental 
agencies.  Though  the  County  Councils  exercise  de- 
cidedly subordinate  functions,  they  possess  a  great 
deal  more  power  than  any  governing  body  in  the 
ordinary  American  county.  California,  however, 
is  making  an  extremely  interesting  and  important 
experiment  in  the  difficult  and  so  far  sadly  unsolved 
problem  of  American  local  self-government  by  allow- 
ing the  people  of  a  county  to  adopt  a  charter  of 
government  in  very  much  the  same  way  that  the 
people  of  a  State  do  a  constitution.  Under  this 
some  of  the  counties  have  set  up  a  considerable  degree 
of  real  self-government. 

Perhaps  it  will  give  a  fairly  satisfactory  idea  to  say 
that  the  powers  of  the  English  County  Council 
cover  in  the  districts  outside  the  cities  in  general 
what  those  of  the  Borough  Council  do  in  the  city, 
and  some  other  things  as  well,  such  as  roads,  rivers, 
contagious  diseases  among  animals,  "reformatories, 
lunatic  asylums,  and  the  smaller  subdivisions  for 
local  government. 

Meetings,  Committees,  etc.  On  account  partly 
of  the  greater  difficulty  of  getting  together,  the 
County  Council  usually  meets  only  so  often  as  re- 
quired by  law,  namely,  four  times  a  year.  For  the 
same  reason  it  allows  its  committees  a  freer  hand  in 
discharging  business  and  possesses  the  right  to  dele- 


248  Local  Government 

gate  to  a  committee  any  of  its  powers  except  laying 
taxes  and  borrowing  money. r 

The  County  Council  employs  a  Clerk  of  similar 
duties  to  those  of  the  Borough  Council  Clerk  and  also 
a  number  of  sanitary  and  engineering  experts,  who, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  similar  borough  officials,  hold 
their  places  by  merit  regardless  of  politics.  The 
members  of  the  Council  are  even  more  generally  re- 
elected  than  in  the  case  of  the  boroughs,  and  also  to 
a  greater  extent  represent  the  upper  class  in  the  com- 
munity. It  is  remarkable  to  how  large  an  extent  the 
English  common  people  choose  to  leave  their  govern- 
ment, from  the  parish  up  to  the  Parliament,  in  the 
hands  of  a  governing  class.  This  class  on  their  part 
accept  it  as  a  trust  and  keep  in  close  touch  with 
public  opinion. 

Central  Control.  The  control  of  the  central 
government  is  stronger  over  the  county  and  other 
rural  governments  than  over  that  of  the  borough. 
The  by-laws  and  borrowings  of  both  are  subject  to 
the  approval  or  veto  of  the  central  government ;  but 
in  addition  to  this,  in  the  case  of  all  local  governments 
except  that  of  the  borough,  the  central  government 
inspects  their  accounts  and  may  compel  any  official 
who  is  responsible  for  the  wrongful  paying  out  of 
money  to  replace  the  amount.  Also  all  matters 
relating  to  police,  health,  sanitation,  education,  gas, 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  272  et  seq. 


County  Government 


249 


electric,  water,  and  street  car  companies  are  very 
considerably  under  the  central  government's  control, 
both  in  the  boroughs  and  other  local  divisions. 
These  powers  of  the  central  government  are  exercised 
in  part  by  the  Home  Secretary,  but  principally  by 
the  Local  Government  Board. 

As  explained  in  regard  to  boroughs,  the  central 
government  supplies  about  one  fourth  of  the  running 
expenses  of  the  county  and  other  local  governments. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

SMALLER  DIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY 

Names  of  Local  Subdivisions.  For  other  pur- 
poses of  local  government  the  county  is  divided  into 
smaller  areas.  These  are  the  urban  district,  the 
rural  district,  the  parish,  and  the  poor  law  union. 
Each  of  these  has  its  own  elected  Council,  consisting 
only  of  the  councilmen  elected  by  the  people,  without 
any  aldermen. 

Suffrage  in  Local  Elections.  Women,  whether 
single  or  married,  can  vote  in  the  elections  for  all 
these  smaller  districts  on  the  same  terms  as  men. 
As  Prof.  Lowell  puts  it,  no  woman  can  vote  for 
members  of  Parliament;  women  without  husbands 
can  vote  in  county  and  borough  elections,  and  all 
women  may  vote  for  officials  of  the  smaller  district 
governments.  Women  can  also  be  elected  members 
of  any  local  government  Council,  in  either  city  or 
county. 

The  Urban  District.  The  urban  district  is  a 
thickly  settled  neighbourhood,  or  even  a  town  or 

250 


Smaller  Divisions  of  the  County    251 

small  city  which  has  not  grown  large  enough  to  need 
all  the  powers  of  a  borough  government  or  does  not 
choose  to  avail  itself  of  them.  The  principal  differ- 
ences are  that  the  urban  district  does  not  enjoy  all  the 
powers  of  self-government  that  belong  to  a  borough 
and  that  its  Council  contains  no  aldermen.  Some 
places  retain  this  form  of  government,  however,  after 
they  have  become  much  larger  than  many  that  have 
borough  charters.  They  vary  in  fact  from  small 
villages  to  cities  of  almost  fifty  thousand  inhabitants. T 

The  Rural  District.  The  rural  district  is  simply 
a  subdivision  of  the  county.  It  is  a  country  dis- 
trict exercising  certain  limited  powers  of  self-govern- 
ment through  its  own  elected  Council. 

The  Parish.  The  parish  is  the  smallest  and  least 
privileged  of  the  governmental  divisions  of  the 
county.  If  it  has  a  population  of  over  three  hundred, 
it  discharges  its  duties  through  an  elected  Parish 
Council;  if  it  has  fewer  inhabitants,  the  voters  meet 
in  mass-meeting  for  the  exercise  of  the  slight  powers 
belonging  to  the  parish,  in  the  same  way  as  in  a  New 
England  town  meeting. 

The  Poor  Law  Union.  The  Poor  Law  Union 
consists  of  a  number  of  parishes  united  for  the  sup- 
port of  an  almshouse  and  the  care  of  the  helpless 
poor.  Its  officers,  called  Poor  Law  Guardians,  are 
elected  by  the  people.  American  counties  of  small 

1  Lowell,  ii.f  278. 


252  Local  Government 

population  might  well  adopt  such  a  plan  for  united 
support  of  their  dependent  poor. 

Collection  of  Local  Taxes.  The  only  other  im- 
portant function  of  the  parish  is  that  it  serves  as 
the  collection  district  for  all  local  taxes  outside  the 
boroughs.1  Just  as  in  many  American  States,  the 
county  treasurer  collects  all  taxes  except  for  city 
purposes  and  turns  over  to  the  school  district,  town- 
ship, or  State  authorities  the  amounts  due  each,  so 
the  parish  officers  turn  over  to  the  county,  urban, 
or  rural  district  and  parish  officials  the  taxes  which 
they  have  collected  upon  the  authority  of  the  Coun- 
cils of  each  of  these  local  divisions  respectively. 

Local  Activity  and  Central  Supervision.  Thus 
we  see  that  England  is  subdivided  in  the  most 
thorough  manner  for  purposes  of  local  self-govern- 
ment, although  the  central  government  through  the 
Home  Secretary,  and  particularly  through  the  Local 
Government  Board,  exercises  a  considerable  degree 
of  control. 

A  much  more  suggestive  contrast  with  the  system 
of  American  State  and  county  government  is  the  fact 
that  Parliament  does  not  permit  to  locally  elected 
officers,  irresponsible  to  the  central  government,  the 
enforcement  or  non -enforcement  of  parliamentary 
laws.  The  laws  made  in  London  are  enforced  by 
men  responsible  to  London,  just  as  in  America  the 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  283. 


Smaller  Divisions  of  the  County    253 

laws  made  in  the  State  capital  should  be  enforced  by 
men  responsible  to  the  State  government.  As  Presi- 
dent Wilson  pointed  out  many  years  ago,  in  the 
American  State  law  is  central,  but  its  enforcement  is 
local,  without  adequate  power  in  the  State  govern- 
ment to  see  that  its  will  is  executed.1  We  boast  of 
our  genius  for  self-government  and  then  enact  State 
laws  to  be  enforced  by  county  officers  whom  neither 
Governor  nor  other  State  officials  can  give  orders  to 
or  remove  for  refusal  to  perform  the  duties  under 
State  law  which  they  are  sworn  to  perform.  We 
call  the  Governor  the  Chief  Executive  and  expect 
him  to  achieve  results  when  we  have  deprived  him 
of  the  largest  part  of  the  machinery  by  which  alone 
he  can  execute  the  law.  The  Comptroller-General, 
Auditor-General,  or  other  such  official  is  declared  to 
be  the  chief  tax  officer  of  the  State  whom  all  county 
tax  officers  must  obey;  and  yet  these  local  officials 
defy  his  orders  and  the  law  itself  with  complete  im- 
punity and  irresponsibility,  so  long  as  they  avoid 
acts  indictable  by  a  grand  jury.  The  Governor 
orders  a  sheriff  to  execute  the  decrees  of  a  court  and 
receives  in  reply  an  insulting  message  to  enforce  the 
law  himself  if  he  does  not  like  the  way  it  is  being 
done ;  and  to  do  this  the  Governor  has  no  machinery 
except  the  militia,  and  government  by  militia  is  both 
bad  and  impossible;  nor  can  he  remove  the  sheriff 

'Wilson,  The  State,  506-7. 


254  Local  Government 

who  thus  defies  the  law  of  the  State,  the  chief  execu- 
tive officer  of  which  he  is  in  his  county,  except  on 
conviction  of  crime. x 

The  English  have  been  as  deeply  prepossessed  in 
favour  of  local  self-government  as  the  Americans, 
who  brought  from  England  both  the  instrumentalities 
and  the  love  of  local  self-government.  Their  pre- 
possessions have  had  to  yield  to  their  reason  and  the 
logic  of  the  changed  circumstances  which  modern 
life  has  brought. a 

Even  in  the  highest  days  of  "  State  sovereignty  "  we 
never  dreamed  of  leaving  the  enforcement  of  federal 
law  to  State  agencies  irresponsible  to  the  federal 
government.  That  experiment  proved  sufficiently 
futile  under  the  Articles  of  Confederation.  But  we 
still  pursue  the  less  logical  system — a  system  more- 
over without  the  excuse  of  historical  or  constitutional 
argument  to  bolster  it  up — of  a  sort  of  county  officer 
sovereignty,  a  sort  of  sovereignty  our  law  has  never 
known  except  by  oversight.  The  State  does  possess 
sovereign  authority  for  all  matters  of  local  govern- 
ment ;  and  yet  it  contents  itself  with  pronouncing  its 
will,  while  it  leaves  its  execution,  which  is  the  part 
that  really  counts,  to  locally  elected  officials  over 

1  This  description  is  of  course  not  accurate  in  all  details  for  every 
American  State ;  it  is  believed,  however,  to  be  a  fair  representation  of 
the  general  American  system  of  State  and  county  government. 

a  I  thank  Prof.  Frank  G.  Bates,  of  Indiana  University,  for  calling 
this  to  my  attention. 


Smaller  Divisions  of  the  County    255 

whom  it  retains  no  administrative  control,  and  re- 
tires into  vacuity.  No  other  civilized  government 
commits  such  an  act  of  self-effacement.  We  can 
imagine  what  a  similar  plan  would  do  for  the  en- 
forcement of  federal  law;  we  see  plainly  enough 
what  it  has  meant  for  the  enforcement  of  State  law. 
Associated  with  this  irresponsibility  of  local  officials 
for  the  proper  administration  of  State  law  which  is 
committed  to  them  are  the  divided,  independent, 
and  sometimes  mutually  hostile  executive  depart- 
ments of  the  State  governments.  It  has  happened 
in  a  number  of  States  that  the  Governor  did  not 
dare  to  consult  his  constitutional  legal  adviser,  the 
Attorney-General,1  and  has  been  in  bitter  conflict 
with  the  State  Treasurer,  Auditor,  Adjutant-General, 
and  other  heads  of  executive  departments  with  whom 
he  must  co-operate  in  conducting  the  government. 
A  moment's  reflection  reveals,  as  does  even  a  cursory 

1  In  South  Carolina  in  1915  the  absurdity  of  the  system  of  divided 
executive  responsibility  was  exhibited  in  unusually  high  light  when 
the  Legislature  felt  obliged  to  go  so  far  as  to  appropriate  for  the  use 
of  the  Governor  in  employing  legal  counsel  in  place  of  the  Attorney- 
General,  with  whom  he  was  in  conflict,  a  sum  exceeding  the  munifi- 
cent salary  of  $1900  provided  for  that  important  official.  The  money, 
did  not  have  to  be  used;  but  no  one  seemed  to  see  in  the  incident 
anything  to  suggest  an  improvement  in  the  system.  Many  thought 
doubtless  that  it  was  a  splendid  example  of  the  system  of  checks  and 
balances,  and  that  if  the  Governor  had  the  right  to  appoint  the 
Attorney-General,  after  the  manner  of  the  President,  he  might  select 
some  man  who  would  advise  him  to  do  something  that  would  en- 
danger the  liberties  of  the  people  before  he  could  be  removed  at  the 
next  election. 


256  Local  Government 

glance  at  the  operation  of  the  system,  that  no 
government  can  be  efficiently  conducted  on  such  a 
plan.  No  other  civilized  government  is  conducted 
in  such  a  tangle  of  mutual  hindrance  and  irresponsi- 
bility. The  President  is  the  executive  of  the  United 
States  and  appoints  and  directs  the  heads  of  the 
executive  departments;  and  hence  whatever  his 
promises  or  policy,  he  has  the  machinery  for  their 
execution.  If  he  proves  a  bad  executive  we  know 
whom  to  relieve  of  office. 

The  States  fell  into  the  habit  of  dividing  executive 
power  in  colonial  days  in  order  to  take  power  from 
the  Crown,  and  their  experience  with  George  III 
threw  them  into  a  panic  at  "one  man  power*'  from 
which  they  have  not  yet  recovered.  Now  that  the 
people  have  been  their  own  sovereign  for  almost  a 
hundred  and  fifty  years,  it  seems  that  they  might 
commit  to  their  own  servant,  the  Governor,  a  degree 
of  authority  somewhat  similar  to  that  committed 
to  the  President,  so  that  their  own  servant  might  be 
able  to  do  the  things  for  which  he  is  employed.  So 
much  the  more  is  it  necessary  to  improve  both  the 
personnel  and  the  machinery  of  our  government  in 
view  of  the  more  extensive  duties,  the  more  difficult 
tasks,  and  graver  responsibilities  that  the  near  future 
seems  sure  to  lay  upon  the  servants  of  the  public. 

Scotland  and  Ireland.  Local  government  is  on 
the  same  general  plan  in  these  countries  as  in  England, 


Smaller  Divisions  of  the  County    257 

with  such  modifications  as  are  suggested  by  their 
historical  peculiarities  and  sparser  populations.  In 
Scotland  and  Ireland  women  possess  the  right  of 
suffrage  and  office-holding  in  local  governments  on 
the  same  terms  as  men. 
17 


CHAPTER  XXIV 

THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  LONDON 

Special  Position  of  London.  Though  the  govern- 
ment of  the  great  metropolis  of  London  is  in  general 
similar  to  the  governments  of  the  borough  and  county 
which  have  already  been  described,  its  importance 
and  the  experiments  which  it  has  made  in  the  govern- 
ment of  a  great  city  require  separate  notice.  London 
has  always  enjoyed  a  position  of  special  privilege, 
from  the  time  when  William  the  Conqueror  granted  a 
charter  guaranteeing  her  ancient  liberties — a  treasure 
still  religiously  preserved.  Even  to  this  day,  on  for- 
mal occasions  the  King  is  met  at  Temple  Bar,  the 
spot  where  stood  the  gate  of  the  mediaeval  city,  now 
of  course  in  the  heart  of  the  metropolis,  and  is  granted 
permission  by  the  Lord  Mayor  to  enter. 

"The  City"  of  London.  Let  us  understand 
the  different  meanings  of  the  name  London.  In  the 
narrowest  sense  it  applies  to  the  area  covered  by  the 
ancient  mediaeval  walled  city.  This  is  a  region 
covering  barely  over  one  square  mile  on  the  northern 

258 


The  Government  of  London        259 

bank  of  the  Thames  in  the  centre  of  the  modern 
London  which  spreads  away  for  many  miles  in  every 
direction.  It  is  still  legally  "the  city  of  London/' 
or  for  short,  "the  city. "  It  extends  from  the  Tower 
on  the  east  to  a  point  a  little  short  of  Westminster 
Abbey  and  the  Houses  of  Parliament  on  the  west. 
The  population  of  this  teeming  business  centre  is  by 
day  among  the  densest  in  the  world;  by  night  it  is 
less  than  twenty  thousand.  To  this  day  it  has  its 
own  city  government. 

The  Administrative  County  of  London.  Sur- 
rounding "the  city"  is  the  administrative  county  of 
London  with  a  population  in  191 1  of  4,522,961 .  This 
vast  population  is  under  the  government  of  the 
London  County  Council;  but  even  this  does  not 
include  much  over  half  of  the  people  who  live  in 
what  is  called  "  Greater  London. "  It  is  the  London 
which  the  people  of  our  own  metropolis  mean  when 
they  say  that  New  York  is  the  largest  city  in  the 
world. 

The  Metropolitan  and  City  Police  District  of 
London.  "Greater  London,"  of  which  we  usually 
think  when  using  the  name,  comprises  an  area  of 
693  square  miles  and  in  1911  contained  7,252,963 
people.  Its  legal  name  is  the  Metropolitan  and 
City  Police  District.  For  a  few  purposes,  such  as 
police  and  water  supply,  all  this  vast  area  is  under 
a  common  authority;  but  for  most  purposes  of  local 


260  Local  Government 

government  the  part  of  the  metropolis  outside  the 
administrative  county  of  London  is  cut  up  into  a 
number  of  local  divisions  such  as  have  been  described 
in  previous  chapters. 

Let  us  examine  in  turn  the  several  governments 
to  which  we  have  referred.  We  shall  take  up  first 
"the  city." 

Common  Council  of  "the  City."  The  "city  of 
London"  is  under  the  government  of  its  own  elected 
Common  Council,  except  for  matters  of  street  cars, 
sewers,  fire  protection,  education,  and  a  few  other 
matters  controlled  by  the  London  County  Council, 
and  except  for  water  supply,  which  is  under  the 
Metropolitan  Water  Board. x 

"The  city"  is  divided  into  twenty-six  wards,  each 
of  which  chooses  one  alderman,  who,  strange  as  it 
may  sound  in  the  twentieth  century,  holds  for  life. 
The  wards  elect  also  annually  two  hundred  and  six 
councilmen.  The  aldermen  and  councilmen  all  sit 
in  one  body  as  the  Common  Council. 

The  Lord  Mayor.  The  twenty-six  aldermen  elect 
annually  from  their  own  number  the  Lord  Mayor  of 
"the  city."  Though  he  exercises  the  powers  of  a 
magistrate,  his  duties  are  mainly  ceremonial  and 
social,  and  his  salary  of  £10,000  by  no  means  covers 
the  expense  of  this  much  coveted  honour. 

The    Suffrage.     The  right    to  vote   for    Council 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  208-10. 


The  Government  of  London        261 

members  is  somewhat  wider  in  the  whole  area  within 
the  bounds  of  the  county  of  London  than  it  is  in  other 
cities ;  for  it  includes  not  only  all  men  and  unmarried 
women  who  can  meet  the  ordinary  borough  franchise 
requirements,  but  also  all  men  not  in  this  class  who 
may  vote  for  members  of  Parliament.  /.  e.  it  in- 
cludes not  only  all  occupiers  of  lands  worth  £10  a 
year  or  of  houses  of  any  value,  but  also  all  £10  lodgers. 
As  in  all  other  boroughs  and  counties,  women  may  be 
elected  to  the  London  County  Council  or  to  any  of  the 
Borough  Councils  now  to  be  described. 

Boroughs  of  the  County  of  London.  The  vast 
city  known  as  the  administrative  county  of  London 
is  divided  into  twenty-eight  boroughs,  each  of  which 
has  its  own  government,  modelled  after  the  form 
which  we  have  already  studied.1  Each  of  these 
elected  Councils  governs  its  own  borough  in  most 
matters  like  any  other  Borough  Council;  but  the 
need  of  uniformity  in  many  important  matters  neces- 
sitates the  exercise  of  authority  over  the  whole  great 
city  within  the  administrative  county  by  one  body, 
the  London  County  Council. 

The  London  County  Council.  Apart  from  the 
legislatures  of  great  states  or  nations,  the  London 
County  Council  is  one  of  the  most  important  govern- 

1  The  Borough  Councils  in  London  have  only  one  sixth  as  many 
aldermen  as  councilmen,  and  the  existing  aldermen  are  not  allowed 
to  vote  for  new  aldermen. 


262  Local  Government 

ing  bodies  in  the  world,  presiding,  as  it  does,  over 
many  of  the  interests  of  four  and  a  half  million 
people.  The  entire  area  of  the  county  of  London, 
including  "the  city,"  is  under  this  body.  The  dis- 
tricts for  electing  members  of  Parliament  serve  as 
wards,  each  electing  two  members  for  three  years. 
The  councilmen  elect  aldermen,  as  usual,  for  six 
years,  equal  to  about  one  sixth  of  the  councilmen, 
one  half  going  out  at  a  time. 

The  Council,  as  in  other  counties,  elects  a  chairman ; 
but  in  London  he  is  not  re-elected  and  so  acquires 
little  influence.  As  in  other  places,  the  method  is 
followed  of  transacting  business  through  committees, 
permanent  professional  expert  officials,  etc. 

Politics.  The  London  County  Council  differs 
from  most  English  County  and  Borough  Councils  in 
the  prominence  of  politics  in  elections  and  Council 
meetings.  This  is  largely  because  the  Progressives 
in  London  have  adopted  an  extensive  program  of 
social  and  economic  reforms,  covering  such  matters 
as  street  car  transportation,  model  tenements  for 
rental  to  the  poor  at  moderate  rates,  etc.,  that  raise 
strong  enthusiasm  or  opposition.  But  their  politics 
are  independent  of  national  party  lines  and  turn 
almost  wholly  on  matters  of  local  concern.1 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  217-18;  231-2.  Lowell  points  out  that  while  London 
is  strongly  Conservative  in  national  politics,  it  is  strongly  Progressive 
in  local;  also  that  party  lines  are  so  closely  drawn  that  the  Moder- 


The  Government  of  London        263 

Metropolitan  Boards.  A  few  matters,  the  chief  of 
which  are  concerned  with  police  and  water  supply, 
so  plainly  require  unified  control  that  they  are  man- 
aged by  the  Metropolitan  Police  Board  and  the 
Metropolitan  Water  Board  of  the  entire  metropolis 
of  seven  and  a  half  million  people,  only  a  little  over 
half  of  whom  live  within  the  county  of  London. 

Though  Greater  London  forms  the  Metropolitan 
Police  District,  the  police  are  under  the  control  of 
the  national  government,  except  that  "the  city" 
has  its  own  system. 

Parts  of  the  City  outside  the  County  of  London. 
When  the  first  steps  were  taken  towards  a  new  system 
of  government  for  modern  London,  it  was  intended 
to  include  under  one  authority  the  entire  metropolis ; 
but  the  rapid  and  unforeseen  growth  of  population 
has  extended  into  a  surrounding  region  almost  six 
times  the  area  of  that  then  organized  under  the  new 
government  and  containing  already  almost  as  many 
people.  These  three  million  city  dwellers  outside 
the  county  of  London  are  organized  into  separate 
boroughs  or  urban  districts  independent  of  any 
common  management,  except  so  far  as  controlled  by 
the  Metropolitan  Boards  of  Water  and  Police.  The 
English  have  come  to  fear  that  setting  one  Council 
over  such  an  immense  population  as  that  contained 

ates  and  Progressives  employ  whips  in  the  Council  to  keep  their 
members  in  line.     For  definition  of  whips,  see  page  76. 


264  Local  Government 

in  the  entire  metropolis  might  prove  dangerous, 
and  are  watching  with  interest  such  experiments  in 
the  management  of  great  urban  areas  under  one 
administration  as  that  afforded  by  Greater  New 
York. 


BOOK  III 
Empire  and  Colonies 


265 


BOOK  m.  EMPIRE  AND  COLONIES 

CHAPTER  XXV 

COLONIES  AND  MOTHER-COUNTRY 

Peculiar  Character  of  the  British  Empire.  The 

only  other  empire  in  history  that  can  be  compared 
in  extent,  variety,  and  complexity  with  the  British 
Empire  is  that  of  ancient  Rome.  And  yet  they  are 
very  different.  The  British  Empire  is  unique  in 
history  for  several  reasons.  In  the  first  place,  it 
includes  large  numbers  of  almost  every  race  and 
colour  of  men.  Second,  it  lies  in  every  zone  of  tem- 
perature from  the  regions  around  the  poles  to  the 
tropics.  Third,  it  has  no  territorial  connection,  but 
is  scattered  in  every  part  of  the  world,  exposed  to 
possible  enemies  from  any  quarter.  This  vast 
empire,  comprising  more  than  a  fifth  of  the  land  and 
more  than  a  fourth  of  the  people  of  the  earth,  has 
been  built  up  by  one  of  the  smallest  of  the  great 
nations  of  the  world  through  its  genius  for  statecraft. 
Enlightened  Administration.  The  government  of 

267 


268  Empire  and  Colonies 

the  numerous  and  varied  dependencies,  though  in 
the  past  sometimes  marked  by  ignorance,  error,  and 
selfishness,  before  English  statesmen  had  come  to 
realize  the  nature  of  the  responsibilities  that  ex- 
panding dominion  imposed  upon  them,  is  today 
conducted  with  a  liberal  regard  for  the  well-being 
of  the  governed.  Indeed  experience  has  proved 
that  in  no  other  way  can  its  subjects  be  kept  loyal; 
and  they  are  far  too  numerous  to  hold  down  by 
force.  An  inestimable  blessing  has  been  the  exten- 
sion of  England's  just  and  liberal  criminal  law 
throughout  her  dominions.  Provisions  exist,  of 
course,  to  meet  local  needs;  but  the  underlying  basis 
of  the  criminal  law  throughout  the  Empire1  has  been 
made  the  same  as  that  with  which  Americans  and 
Englishmen  are  familiar.  The  Empire  presents  the 
object  lesson  of  a  small  number  of  civilized  white 
men  gradually  repressing  the  barbarous  customs  of 
the  backward  races  of  mankind  and  leading  them 
into  a  higher  life.  Admiral  Dewey  declared:  "After 
many  years  of  wandering  I  have  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  mightiest  factor  in  the  civilization 
of  the  world  is  the  imperial  policy  of  England." 

No  Tribute.  The  possessions  pay  nothing  to  the 
support  of  the  British  Government,  but  on  the  con- 

1  With  the  exception  of  a  few  possessions.  Some  colonies  also 
retain  their  own  system  of  civil  law.  Cyclopedia  Britannica,  vii., 
462. 


Colonies  and  Mother-Country      269 

trary  are  a  source  of  expense  to  the  government,  as 
e.  g.,  because  of  the  great  navy  which  must  be  main- 
tained for  their  defence.  Each  colony,  however, 
bears  the  cost  of  its  own  government,  paying  out  of 
its  taxes  the  salaries  of  the  governor  and  other  offi- 
cials sent  from  England,  as  well  as  of  those  who  are 
natives  or  are  elected  by  the  people  of  the  colony. 

The  Advantages  which  England  Derives.  Though 
the  colonies  pay  no  tribute,  they  are  nevertheless  of 
great  advantage  to  Great  Britain.  First,  her  trade 
with  these  vast  regions  is  much  greater  than  it  would 
be  if  they  were  not  under  her  flag.  This  makes  her 
manufacturers,  merchants,  and  ship-owners  very 
rich  and  thus  creates  immense  resources  for  taxation 
and  other  national  needs.  The  merchants,  etc., 
are  the  sponges  which  absorb  gold  from  all  over  the 
world;  the  government  then  squeezes  the  sponges. 
Associated  with  this  advantage  is  the  employment 
for  millions  of  working-men  who  carry  on  the  labour 
of  this  system  of  manufacture  and  commerce. 

A  second  benefit  is  that  the  colonies  that  lie  in 
the  temperate  zones  furnish  homes  for  the  large 
numbers  of  people  who  leave  the  British  Isles  because 
of  crowded  conditions.  Instead  of  being  lost  to  the 
mother-country,  they  build  up  new  and  powerful 
Englands  all  over  the  world. 

A  third  advantage  is  that  these  possessions  supply 
means  of  defence  against  enemies  who,  if  they  held 


270  Empire  and  Colonies 

them,  would  forbid  England's  trade  or  cripple  her 
industries;  for,  although  England  has  heretofore 
allowed  all  nations  to  trade  with  her  colonies  on  an 
equality  with  herself,1  such  a  policy  could  not  be 
expected  of  most  of  the  powerful  European  nations, 
whose  policies  are  along  lines  of  restriction  rather 
than  of  free  trade. 

A  fourth  benefit  is  that  in  time  of  war  the  colonies 
send  troops,  and  some  of  the  larger  send  warships, 
for  the  defence  of  the  mother-country.  In  ordinary 
emergencies  the  armies  sent  by  the  colonies  are  paid 
out  of  the  British  treasury;  but  in  a  great  struggle 
the  colonies  pour  out  their  money  as  well  as  men  for 
the  defence  of  the  Empire,  which  they  feel  is  as 
much  theirs  as  it  is  the  mother-country's. 

Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies.  The  rela- 
tions of  mother-country  and  colonies  are  in  charge  of 
a  Cabinet  Minister  entitled  Secretary  of  State  for  the 
Colonies.  He  has  oversight  of  Britain's  world-wide 
empire,  with  the  exception  of  some  "protectorates," 
which,  though  practically  colonial  possessions,  are 
technically  foreign  and  are  hence  under  the  Foreign 
Secretary,  and  with  the  exception  also  of  India, 
whose  vastness  necessitates  a  department  of  its  own. 


'A  few  restrictions  are  laid  on  outsiders  by  colonial,  not  by 
English,  law.  What  will  be  done  to  execute  the  threat  of  severe 
strictions  against  the  commerce  of  former  enemies  after  the  Great 
War,  only  time  can  tell. 


Colonies  and  Mother-Country       271 

Varying  Degrees  of  Control.  The  degree  of 
authority  which  the  Crown  actually  exercises  in 
managing  the  affairs  of  different  colonies  varies 
greatly,  as  will  appear  when  we  reach  that  subject; 
and  hence  the  duties  of  the  Colonial  Secretary  range 
all  the  way  from  keeping  a  great  colony  like  Canada 
in  good  humour  to  directing  entirely  the  government 
of  some  savage  possession  in  Africa. 

Four  Classes  of  Dependencies.  The  numerous 
varieties  of  dependencies  belonging  to  the  Empire 
may  be  grouped  into  four  main  classes:  Self-govern- 
ing colonies,  crown  colonies  with  partial  self-govern- 
ment, crown  colonies  without  self-government,  and 
protectorates.  The  general  character  of  each  class 
is  apparent  from  its  name,  and  each  will  be  described 
in  detail  in  the  following  chapters. 

A  Loosely  Organized  System.  The  Empire  has 
no  organic  common  life  in  which^all  the  parts  par- 
ticipate. There  is  no  common  government  in  which 
each  has  its  share.  One  colony  has  no  connection 
with  the  others,  except  that  in  some  cases,  to  be 
described,  several  lying  near  each  other  have  been 
united  into  unions;  but  a  union  of  this  sort  is  rather 
of  the  nature  of  one  separate  colony  whose  parts 
exercise  control  in  local  affairs.  So  free,  in  fact, 
are  the  self-governing  colonies  to  follow  their  own 
devices  that  they  lay  tariffs  against  each  other  and 
against  the  mother-country  and  in  some  cases  even 


272  Empire  and  Colonies 

forbid  immigrants  from  certain  other  colonies,  as,  e.  g., 
British  Columbia  attempting  to  exclude  the  Hindus. 

The  unity  of  the  Empire  consists  in  a  common 
patriotism  and  the  dependence  upon  a  common 
mother-country.  The  Empire,  as  suggested  by 
this  term,  may  be  thought  of  as  a  mother  with  her 
family  of  daughters;  but  all  the  daughters  are  never 
gathered  in  any  family  circle,  though  the  more  ad- 
vanced of  them  are  beginning  to  meet  together  with 
the  mother  for  common  council,  and  many  of  them 
do  not  even  know  each  other.1 

Colonial  Agents.  For  each  colony  there  is  an 
agent  residing  in  London,  in  close  touch  with  the 
colonial  department.  In  the  self-governing  colonies 
he  is  elected  by  the  colony,  in  the  non-self-governing 
he  is  appointed  by  the  Secretary  of  the  State  for  the 
Colonies.  It  is  his  duty  to  keep  his  colony  informed 
of  anything  affecting  its  interests,  to  prevent  un- 
favourable measures  in  Parliament  or  the  colonial 
department,  and  to  put  such  information  at  the 
disposal  of  these  authorities  as  will  guide  them  in 
the  proper  discharge  of  their  duties.  Benjamin 
Franklin  was  for  many  years  the  Agent  for  Penn- 
sylvania, and  at  times  for  as  many  as  four  colonies 
at  once,  in  which  position  he  discharged  his  duties 
in  a  way  that  ranked  him  in  importance  with  the 
most  distinguished  ambassadors. 

1  For  the  imperial  Conferences  here  referred  to,  see  page  332. 


Colonies  and  Mother-Country       273 

Means  of  Imperial  Control.  The  control  of  the 
mother-country  is  exercised  through  these  four 
means : 

First,  the  royal  Governor,  who  represents  every- 
where the  authority  of  the  same  Crown  and  loyalty 
to  a  common  Empire. 

Second,  the  power  of  the  Governor,  and  above 
him  of  the  Crown  (i.  e.  the  Minister  for  the  Colonies) 
to  veto  any  act  of  a  colonial  legislature,  thus  pre- 
venting measures  which  tend  to  injure  common 
interests  or  weaken  the  imperial  tie. 

Third,  the  control  of  foreign  affairs,  by  which 
means  any  foreign  power  is  prevented  from  inter- 
fering with  any  part  of  the  Empire  or  winning  away 
the  allegiance  of  a  colony,  and  a  colony  is  prevented 
from  sacrificing  the  interests  of  the  Empire  to  its 
own  particular  interests. 

And  lastly,  the  right  of  appeal  from  the  highest 
court  of  a  colony  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the 
Privy  Council  in  England.1 

After  a  brief  account  of  the  system  of  home  rule 
provided  for  Ireland,  we  shall  explain  more  fully 
the  government  of  the  various  classes  of  colonies. 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  402. 
18 


CHAPTER  XXVI 

IRISH  HOME  RULE1 

Peculiar  Situation  of  Ireland.  Ireland  is  not  a 
colony,  but  she  occupies  such  an  important  and  pecu- 
liar position  in  the  Empire  as  to  demand  a  separate 
notice.  Due  to  racial,  religious,  and  economic 
differences,  the  problem  of  ruling  Ireland  and  Eng- 
land under  one  government  presents  unusual  diffi- 
culties. Complete  national  independence  for  the 
smaller  island  would  be  perilous  in  the  foreign 
relations  of  both;  to  admit  Ireland  to  full  participa- 
tion in  a  common  Parliament  is  a  delusive  equality, 
as  she  is  so  much  smaller  in  population  as  to  be  practi- 
cally reduced  to  subjection  to  her  larger  partner. 
The  Home  Rule  Act  of  1914,  passed  over  the  opposi- 
tion of  the  House  of  Lords, 2  is  an  attempt  to  preserve 
the  advantages  which  both  peoples  derive  from  union 
towards  the  rest  of  the  world  and  at  the  same  time 

1  The  statements  in  this  chapter  are  based  on  the  law  itself,  as 
passed  in  1914,  and  hence  differ  in  some  points  from  statements 
made  from  the  incompleted  bill. 

2  See  page  24. 

274 


Irish  Home  Rule  275 

allow  the  smaller  country  the  freedom  of  ordering 
her  own  internal  affairs.  The  provisions  of  this 
law  are  as  follows;  but  on  account  of  the  outbreak 
of  the  Great  War  in  Europe  and  the  violent  opposi- 
tion in  north-eastern  Ireland  to  Home  Rule,  the 
system  has  been  suspended  from  going  into  immediate 
operation. 

Representation  in  the  Imperial  Parliament.  The 
legislative  union  between  England  and  Ireland 
dating  from  1800  is  not  destroyed,  though  pro- 
foundly modified,  by  the  Home  Rule  Act.  Ireland 
is  still  to  send  forty-two  members  to  the  British 
House  of  Commons,1  possessing  full  powers  in  de- 
bating and  voting  on  all  questions  concerning  any 
part  or  the  whole  of  the  Empire.  The  twenty-eight 
Irish  representative  peers  continue  to  sit  in  the 
House  of  Lords. 

The  Irish  Parliament.  The  Irish  Parliament, 
meeting  in  Dublin,  consists  of  two  houses,  a  Senate 
and  a  House  of  Commons.  The  House  of  Commons 
consists  of  164  members,  elected  for  five  years  unless 
sooner  dissolved.  Nine  districts  elect  three,  four, 
or  five  representatives  on  one  ticket ;  many  elect  two, 
and  the  others  one.  In  the  case  of  the  nine  first 
mentioned,  the  election  is  arranged  in  such  a  way 
that  any  considerable  minority  of  the  voters  who 
agree  to  concentrate  their  .preferences  may  elect 

1  Instead  of  103,  as  before. 


276  Empire  and  Colonies 

one  member  of  the  three  or  perhaps  two  of  the  five. 
Some  representation  of  the  minority  is  necessary 
for  just  legislation  and  good  administration  in  any 
government,  and  particularly  in  a  country  in  which 
minority  and  majority  consist  of  permanent  classes 
with  opposing  interests.1 

For  the  first  five  years,  the  Senators,  of  whom 
there  are  forty,  are  to  be  appointed  by  the  Lord- 
Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  the  representative  of  the 
imperial  government  in  Ireland,  after  which  they 
are  to  be  elected  all  at  the  same  time,  for  a  fixed 
term  of  five  years,  which  is  not  to  be  affected  by 
dissolution  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Each  of  the 
four  provinces  into  which  the  country  is  divided 
elects,  in  proportion  to  population,  from  six  to  four- 
teen Senators  on  one  ticket.  The  same  means  of 
securing  representation  for  the  minority  is  employed 
as  in  the  election  of  the  Irish  House  of  Commons. 

Not  only  any  commoner,  but  any  peer,  either 
Scotch,  English,  or  Irish,  may  be  a  member  of  either 
house  of  the  Irish  Parliament.  Unlike  the  British 
usage,  a  Minister  may  speak  in  either  house,  though 
he  may  vote  only  in  the  one  of  which  he  is  a  member. 

Supremacy  of  the  Commons.  Following  the 
principle  achieved  in  the  Parliament  Act  of  1911,* 

'The  Irish  Parliament  will  contain  two  university  members 
(see  page  31). 

2  See  page  24.  The  same  exception  is  made  as  in  the  British 
Parliament  Act  of  1911  in  the  case  of  private  bills. 


Irish  Home  Rule  277 

the  Irish  Senate  cannot  interfere  with  bills  for  rais- 
ing or  spending  the  public  revenues;  and  their  op- 
position to  bills  of  any  other  kind  may  be  overcome 
within  two  sessions,  by  the  Commons  demanding  a 
joint  sitting,  in  which  the  two  bodies  vote  as  one.  If 
the  measure  had  any  decided  majority  in  the  House, 
it  would  be  almost  sure  of  passage  by  this  joint  vote. 

The  Responsible  Ministry  of  the  Irish  govern- 
ment will  exercise  the  same  functions  and  stand  in 
the  same  relations  to  the  House  of  Commons  as 
have  already  been  explained  in  describing  the 
English  Government.1 

Limitations  upon  Home  Rule.  The  Irish  Parlia- 
ment possesses  by  no  means  the  unlimited  power, 
even  in  Ireland,  that  the  imperial  Parliament  exer- 
cises in  England  or  other  parts  of  the  Empire.  Its 
limitations  are  such  in  fact  as  to  cause  serious  dis- 
satisfaction among  most  of  the  Irish  people,  though 
it  is  difficult  to  see  how  they  could  at  present  be 
made  less  without  inviting  rebellion  by  the  minority 
in  the  north-east  who  are  opposed  to  Home  Rule  in 
any  form. 

Some  of  the  restrictions  are  temporary  and  may 
be  removed  after  a  few  years  if  the  Irish  Parliament 
so  desires,  as,  e.  g.,  the  control  over  the  police,2  old 


1  See  Chapters  IV  and  XI. 

2  The  police  pass  under  Irish  control  automatically  at  the  end 
of  six  years. 


278  Empire  and  Colonies 

age  pensions,  working-men's  insurance,  postal  and 
other  savings  banks.  Of  the  permanent  restrictions, 
the  most  important  are  that  the  Irish  Parliament 

(1)  may  not  pass  any  law  concerning  the  Crown, 

(2)  nor  coinage,  (3)  nor  levy  any  tariff,  income,  or. 
internal   revenue    duty   more   than   ten   per   cent, 
higher  than   the   rates  enforced  in   England1;    (4) 
nor  charge  any  import  duty  on  any  article  not  on 
the  English  list  of  dutiable  articles;  (5)  nor  impose 
an  import  of  export  duty  on  commerce  with  Great 
Britain;  (6)  nor  legislate  on  treason,  peace  and  war, 
and  foreign  relations;  (7)  nor  alter  the  laws  estab- 
lished during  the  past  few  decades  for  accomplishing 
the  gradual  transfer  of  land  from  the  great  land- 
lords to  small  farmers2;  (8)  nor  establish  any  state 
church,  nor  set  up  any  religious  test  for  office,  em- 
ployment, or  any  other  purpose,  nor  in  any  way 
give  one  religion  an  advantage  over  another.     Nor 
may  Ireland  alter  the  Home  Rule  Act  itself. 

Privileges.  In  view  of  the  poverty  of  Ireland — 
largely  the  result  of  England's  injustice  in  the  past 
• — Ireland  is  not  only  to  contribute  nothing  to  the 
support  of  the  imperial  government,  but  is  to  re- 
ceive from  that  source  a  gift,  beginning  at  £500,000 


1  Except  that  they  can  tax  liquors  as  high  as  they  choose. 

'The  Irish  Land  Purchase  Act  of  1903  is  said  to  have  turned 
from  renters  to  owners  300,000  farmers,  occupying  more  than  half 
the  area  of  the  country.— WILLIAM  O'BRIEN  in  Nineteenth  Century 
and  After,  Ixvii.,  429  and  433. 


Irish  Home  Rule  279 

a  year,  and  gradually  sinking  after  nine  years  to 
£200,000  a  year.1  Ireland  is  thus  relieved  of  the 
stupendous  burden  of  military  and  naval  expenditure 
while  enjoying  all  its  benefits.  Irishmen  who  choose 
to  enlist  will  of  course  still  form  part  of  the  armed 
forces  of  the  Empire. 

Reserved  Powers  of  the  Imperial  Government. 
Besides  the  fact,  which  must  always  be  kept  in 
mind,  that  the  British,  or  as  it  is  often  called,  the 
imperial,  Parliament  is  supreme  throughout  the 
Empire,  there  are  the  following  reservations  specifi- 
cally stated  in  the  case  of  Ireland : 

The  Lord-Lieutenant  of  Ireland  (the  appointee 
and  representative  of  the  Crown)  can  veto  any  act 
of  the  Irish  Parliament,  and  so  may  the  imperial 
government  itself.  The  King's  Privy  Council 
(which  practically  means  the  British  Ministry)  can 
quash  any  law  of  the  Irish  Parliament  or  act  of  an 
Irish  official  that  is  contrary  to  the  Home  Rule 
Act  in  much  the  same  way  in  which  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court  annuls  an  unconstitutional 
act  of  Congress  or  of  an  executive  officer.  And 
finally,  the  imperial  Parliament  (in  which  the  forty- 

1  If  Ireland  shall  in  future  come  to  be  more  prosperous,  a  revi- 
sion of  the  financial  arrangement  with  Great  Britain  may  be  made 
by  the  imperial  Parliament,  for  which  purpose  the  Irish  will  send 
to  that  Parliament  a  number  of  representatives  proportionate  to 
her  share  of  the  population  of  the  United  Kingdom.  This  would 
be  almost  double  her  forty-two  there  regularly  under  the  Home 
Rule  Act. 


280  Empire  and  Colonies 

two  Irish  members  have  voice  and  vote)  may  in 
case  of  need  pass  any  law  for  Ireland  that  it  deems 
fit. 

Final  appeal  from  Irish  courts  may  be  taken  to 
the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council1  instead 
of  to  the  House  of  Lords  as  formerly. 

The  Future.  The  degree  of  Home  Rule  which  has 
been  attained  marks  a  long  step  towards  removing 
the  ancient  blighting  animosity  between  England 
and  Ireland.  So  far  "the  Emerald  Isle"  has  less 
self-government  than  Canada,  Australia,  or  South 
Africa,  and  it  is  certain  that  her  demands  will  not 
cease  until  she  is  placed  more  nearly  on  an  equality 
with  other  parts  of  the  United  Kingdom.  The 
difficulties  of  the  problem  have  already  caused  Brit- 
ish statesmen  to  study  more  carefully  the  federal 
system  as  it  exists  in  the  United  States.  The  solu- 
tion, not  only  of  this,  but  of  other  serious  imperial 
problems,  may  ultimately  come  through  the  adoption 
of  some  form  of  federalism,  which  has  so  wonder- 
fully succeeded  in  our  own  country  in  serving  the 
common  national  interests  of  the  people  and  at  the 
same  time  preserving  their  rights  of  local  self- 
government. 

1  See  page  202. 


CHAPTER  XXVII 

SELF-GOVERNING  COLONIES  AND  DOMINIONS1 

Legal  Supremacy  of  Parliament.  Though  Par- 
liament has  supreme  authority  over  every  part  of 
the  British  dominions,  it  cannot  conveniently  inter- 
fere constantly  in  the  affairs  of  distant  colonies, 
first,  because  of  lack  of  time  and  information,  and 
second,  because  that  would  create  dissatisfaction. 
In  the  case  of  the  great  self-governing  colonies  it 
has  accordingly  passed  laws  somewhat  similar  to  the 
constitution  of  an  American  State,  describing  the 
form  of  government  and  laying  down  the  duties, 
powers,  and  limitations  of  the  various  officers  and 
departments.  Just  as  a  State  constitution  is  the 
directions  of  the  sovereign,  the  people,  for  conduct- 
ing the  government  of  the  State,  so  these  laws  are 
the  directions  of  the  sovereign,  Parliament,  for 
conducting  the  government  of  the  colonies. 

1  An  exhaustive  work  on  every  detail  of  the  subject  is  A.  B.  Keith's 
Responsible  Government  in  the  Dominions.  3  volumes.  Oxford, 
1912. 

281 


282  Empire  and  Colonies 

The  self-government  of  the  great  confederations 
of  Canada  and  Australia  goes  so  far  that  their  con- 
stitutions were  in  fact  drawn  up  in  the  colonies  and 
then  at  their  request  enacted  by  Parliament;  and 
much  the  same  is  true  of  South  Africa.1 

Dominions.  Canada,  Australia,  South  Africa,  and 
New  Zealand  are  called  dominions.  Though  New 
Zealand  is  not  a  federation,  as  are  the  other  three,  and 
cannot  rival  them  in  area  of  population,  yet  her  po- 
litical vigour,  her  critical  geographical  situation,  her 
imperial  loyalty,  and  the  importance  of  binding  her 
as  closely  as  possible  to  the  Empire,  led  in  1907  to 
her  being  raised  to  this  honourable  rank.  A  Domin- 
ion occupies  a  position  of  prestige  and  consideration 
distinctly  superior  to  that  enjoyed  by  an  ordinary 
self-governing  colony.  It  is  consulted  "automat- 
ically" so  far  as  possible  on  international  agree- 
ments affecting  its  interests,  and  the  four  Dominions 
may  together  almost  be  regarded  as  a  sort  of  advisory 
council  on  imperial  affairs.  For  instance,  in  July, 
1911,  the  Anglo- Japanese  alliance  was  revised  and 
renewed  with  their  knowledge  and  concurrence.2 

Confederations  of  Colonies.  In  somewhat  the 
same  way  that  the  thirteen  colonies  which  formed 
the  United  States  perceived  that  they  could  serve 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  400;  Cyclopedia  Britannica,  nth  edition;  Sir  Charles 
Fitzpatrick  "On  the  Constitution  of  Canada,"  Repts.  Amer.  Bar 
Asso.t  xxxix.,  410. 

a  Cross's  England  and  Greater  Britain,  1081,  n.  2. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  283 

their  common  interests  by  uniting  for  certain  pur- 
poses of  government,  so  in  later  years  groups  of 
British  colonies  have  drawn  together  for  common 
ends,  but  without  any  idea  of  separating  from  the 
mother-country.  These  confederations  present  a 
combination  of  the  principles  of  the  governments 
of  England  and  the  United  States.  The  responsible 
Ministry  and  the  parliamentary  system  are  derived 
from  the  former;  but  the  federal  principle  of  uniting 
for  purposes  of  common  concern,  while  retaining  the 
functions  of  local  self-government  in  each  province 
is  copied  from  the  latter. 

THE  DOMINION  OF  CANADA 

Composition  of  the  Dominion.  The  oldest  and 
most  important  of  the  colonial  federations  is  the 
Dominion  of  Canada,  which  dates  from  1867.  The 
principles  of  responsible  government  by  Parliament 
and  Ministry  are  practised  here  more  completely 
than  in  any  other  place  outside  of  the  mother- 
country.  The  Dominion  consists  of  ten  member 
provinces,  as  our  own  country  consists  of  forty-eight 
States,  and  has  also  one  territory  without  the  privi- 
leges of  membership  and  self-government.1 

1  Yukon,  though  called  a  territory,  has  a  representative  in  the 
Dominion  Parliament  and  an  elected  Council  for  local  government. 
"The  Northwest  Territories"  has  neither. — Statesman's  Year  Book 
fcr  1915,  274-5,  312-13;  Northwest  Territories  Act  of  1906,  section 
6;  Yukon  Act  of  1908,  section  7. 


284  Empire  and  Colonies 

The  Governor-General.  The  formal  head  of  the 
Dominion  executive  is  the  Governor-General,  who 
is  appointed  by  the  Crown,  i.  e.  the  Prime  Minister, 
after  consultation  with  the  Colonial  Secretary.  The 
position  of  the  Governor-General  in  Canada  is 
similar  to  that  of  the  King  of  England,  and  hence 
the  law  in  saying  that  he  does  thus  and  so  is  always 
to  be  understood  as  meaning  that  he  acts  in  accord 
with  the  advice  of  his  Ministers.  Yet  a  wise  and 
tactful  Governor-General  exercises  a  very  real  and 
important  influence  on  the  course  of  administration 
and  legislation.1  One  Governor-General  has  even 
declared  that  he  found  that  he  could  accomplish 
more  as  the  executive  of  Canada  without  legal  power 
than  he  could  in  some  other  colonies  with  it. 

The  Veto.  Laws  in  Canada,  as  in  other  colonies, 
are  subject  to  two  vetoes;  that  of  the  Governor- 
General  and  that  of  the  British  Government.  The 
Governor-General  may  take  any  one  of  three  courses 
regarding  bills  passed  by  the  Dominion  Parliament. 
First,  he  may  refuse  to  sign.  This  is  commonly 
called  vetoing  the  bill,  and  kills  it  at  once,  though 
the  King  (i.  e.  the  British  Ministry)  may  reverse 
this  action  and  save  the  law.  Second,  he  may  sign 
the  bill.  The  King  (i.  e.  the  British  Ministry)  may, 
after  this,  kill  the  law  by  vetoing  it  within  two  years, 
but  not  after  that  time.  Third,  the  Governor- 

1  Cf.,  e.  g.,  Repts.  Amer.  Bar  Asso.,  xxxix.,  414. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  285 


General  may  decline  either  to  sign  or  veto  the  bill 
but  instead  may  reserve  it  for  the  King's  decision. 
The  King  may  veto  or  confirm  the  bill  at  any  time 
within  two  years.  If  he  does  neither  within  that 
time,  it  dies  of  itself. x  The  tendency  seems  to  be  for 
the  veto,  whether  by  the  Governor-General  or  by  the 
King,  to  settle  into  a  sort  of  supreme  court  function 
of  annulling  at  once  laws  thought  to  be  unconsti- 
tutional because  transcending  the  powers  granted 
the  legislature  in  the  fundamental  law,  instead  of 
waiting  for  their  annulment  by  judicial  process  in  the 
course  of  a  lawsuit. 

Yet  the  veto  is  so  rarely  exercised  over  Dominion 
legislation  that  we  may  say  that  it  is  gradually 
becoming  almost  as  much  the  Governor-General's 
obligation  to  sign  all  acts  presented  to  him  as  it  is 
the  King's  to  affix  his  signature  without  question 
to  any  act  of  Parliament  in  England,  unless  the  act 
of  the  Canadian  Parliament  be  one  which  is  clearly 
injurious  to  important  imperial  interests.  In  fact 
it  is  admitted  that  the  Governor-General  has  practi- 
cally no  choice  but  to  sign  measures  concerning 
Canadian  affairs  alone ;  and  he  exercises  less  and  less 
power  of  vetoing  even  laws,  such  as  tariffs,  that 
affect  the  mother-country  or  relations  with  foreign 
states. 

The  Prime  Minister  the  Real  Chief  Executive. 

1  British  North  America  Act,  sections  56-7;  Keith,  ii.,  1009, 1010. 


286  Empire  and  Colonies 

The  prominence  of  the  Governor-General  must  not 
blind  us  to  the  fact  that  the  real  chief  executive  in 
Canada  is  the  Prime  Minister  of  the  Dominion. 
His  position  is  as  exact  a  copy  as  possible  of  that  of 
the  British  Premier. 

The  Governor-General  must  act  in  accordance 
with  the  advice  of  his  Ministry.  If  he  should  refuse 
to  do  so,  they  would  resign.  If  the  Governor- 
General  could  obtain  a  new  Ministry  who  would 
adopt  his  views  and  could  command  a  majority  in 
the  Canadian  House  of  Representatives,  he  would 
succeed  in  having  his  way;  but  only  because  the 
event  proved  that  the  people's  representatives  ap- 
proved his  policy  rather  than  that  of  his  former 
Ministers.  If  the  House  of  Representatives  refused 
to  sustain  his  new  Ministers,  he  would  be  obliged  to 
recall  his  old  ones  and  submit  to  their  policy.  Such 
an  attempt  of  the  Governor-General  would  be  most 
unusual,  if  indeed  we  may  not  consider  it  today 
entirely  in  the  realm  of  theory.1 

Parliament  and  Ministry.  The  Dominion  Parlia- 
ment consists  of  a  Senate  appointed  for  life  from 
Canadians  by  the  Governor-General  (acting,  of 
course,  on  the  advice  of  the  Canadian  Ministry), 
and  a  House  of  Commons  elected  by  the  people  for 
a  term  of  five  years  unless  sooner  dissolved.  Parties, 

1  Sir  Charles  Fitzpatrick  in  Repts.  of  Amer.  Bar  Asso.,  xxxix., 
4H-5. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  287 

Premier,  and  a  Ministry  responsible  to  the  lower 
house  play  the  same  part  as  we  have  already  ob- 
served in  England.  The  Commons  are  much  the 
more  powerful  body,  as  they  make  and  unmake 
Ministries  and  introduce  practically  all  legislation. 
The  only  legal  limitation  on  the  power  of  the  Senate 
is  that  it  may  not  originate  any  bill  for  imposing 
taxes  or  spending  money;  but  by  custom  it  has 
settled  into  a  position  similar  to  that  of  the  Lords 
in  England  as  a  house  of  cautious  revision.  The 
Senate  rejects  measures  of  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives but  rarely. 

No  colony  has  any  system  of  nobility  or  other 
hereditary  titles,  though  the  title  of  Sir  has  been 
conferred  by  the  British  Government  upon  a  number 
of  colonials  and  titles  of  nobility  on  a  few.  Those 
created  peers,  however,  have  been  so  closely  identi- 
fied by  long  residence  or  otherwise  with  the  mother- 
country  as  to  be  almost  as  much  Englishmen  in  the 
narrower  sense  as  citizens  of  the  colonies.  In  Austra- 
lia the  aversion  to  titles  is  so  strong  that  numbers 
of  prominent  statesmen  have  declined  them,  and  a 
resolution  has  been  offered  to  make  the  bearing  of 
them  in  that  country  illegal.1 

The  Supreme  Court.  There  is  a  Dominion  su- 
preme court  to  hear  appeals  from  the  provincial 
supreme  courts.  Appeal  lies  in  the  last  resort  from 

Keith's  Responsible  Government  in  the  Dominions. 


288  Empire  and  Colonies 

this  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council 
in  England.  Among  the  most  important  and  diffi- 
cult cases  have  been  those  involving  the  relative 
rights  of  the  provinces  and  the  Dominion.  They 
have  usually  been  decided  in  favour  of  the  latter. 

The  position  of  the  Canadian  court  will  appear 
more  plainly  by  comparison  and  contrast  with  the 
Australian  Supreme  Court,  as  explained  on  page  294. 
Though  the  Canadian  Supreme  Court  may  declare 
an  act  of  the  Canadian  Parliament  null  because  in 
conflict  with  the  constitution,  as  we  might  call  the 
British  North  America  Act  by  analogy  with  the 
American  written  Constitution,  it  is  not  the  supreme 
guardian  and  ultimate  authority  in  defending  the 
constitution,  and  hence  cannot  be  considered  co- 
ordinate with  the  legislature.  In  fact  it  is  not  created 
by  the  constitution,  but  is  simply  authorized  as  a 
court  which  the  Canadian  Parliament  may  create 
and  organize  as  it  sees  fit.1  The  final  decision  rests 
with  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council 
in  London.  This  body,  like  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States,  annuls  Canadian  laws  because 
of  their  conflict  with  the  Canadian  fundamental  law, 
and  not  because  of  any  opinion  simply  as  to  their 
injustice  or  unwisdom. 

Both  the  Dominion  judges  and  the  provincial 
judges  are  appointed  by  the  Dominion  executive 

1  British  North  America  Act,  section  101. 


Self-Governing  Colonies-          289 

during  good  behaviour.  There  is  no  separate  sys- 
tem of  provincial  and  Dominion  courts,  as  the  State 
and  federal  courts  in  the  United  States,  but  pro- 
vincial and  Dominion  law  is  administered  in  the 
same  courts.1 

The  Provinces  and  the  Dominion.  The  ten  mem- 
ber provinces  of  the  Dominion  conduct  their  own 
local  affairs  in  much  the  same  way  as  do  the  States 
of  our  Union.  Except  Nova  Scotia  and  Quebec, 
each  has  an  elected  Legislative  Assembly  of  one 
house.  These  two  ancient  provinces  have  also  an 
appointed  upper  house,  or  Legislative  Council, 
though,  as  in  the  others,  the  provincial  Ministry  is 
responsible  to  the  popularly  elected  branch  in  the 
same  way  as  the  British  Ministry  is  to  the  House  of 
Commons. 

The  Canadian  provinces  do  not,  however,  enjoy 
such  an  extensive  or  secure  body  of  powers  that  the 
central  government  must  respect,  as  does  an  Ameri- 
can State.  Their  taxing  power  is  so  far  restricted 
that  they  receive  large  gifts  annually  from  the  Do- 
minion government,  and  they  occupy  in  every  way  a 
place  much  inferior  in  independence  and  dignity 
to  that  of  a  member  of  our  federal  Union.  In  fact 
the  principle  of  reserved  powers  in  the  United  States 
and  Canada  is  exactly  opposite;  for,  whereas  in  the 

British  North  America  Act,  section  96;  Egerton's  Federations 
and  Unions  in  the  British  Empire,  210,  n.  I. 
19 


290  Empire  and  Colonies 

United  States  certain  enumerated  powers  are  granted 
to  the  central  government  and  all  others  are  reserved 
to  the  States,  in  Canada  the  powers  which  the  pro- 
vinces are  intended  to  exercise  are  named  and  all 
others  are  reserved  to  the  Dominion  government. 
The  latter  can  accordingly  control  a  great  many 
things  which  in  our  country  are  reserved  to  the  in- 
dividual States.  As  indicated  in  the  last  section, 
the  tendency  of  constitutional  interpretation  by  the 
supreme  court  is  distinctly  towards  magnifying  the 
power  of  the  central,  or  Dominion,  government. 

Another  feature  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Dominion 
government  is  the  fact  that  the  Governor-General 
may  within  one  year  veto  any  act  of  a  provincial 
legislature.  In  this,  as  in  the  performance  of  his 
other  governmental  functions,  he  acts  on  the  advice 
of  his  Ministry,  or,  in  the  rare  cases  calling  for  the 
veto  of  a  provincial  law  for  imperial  reasons,  on  the 
orders  of  the  government  in  London. 

The  Provincial  Executive.  The  chief  executive 
in  each  province  is  the  Lieutenant-Governor,  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor-General  and  possessing  a 
theoretical  veto  power.  But  "the  official  Canadian 
view  is  that  refusal  of  assent"  by  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor  "is  never  legitimate"  except  on  the  advice 
of  the  Prime  Minister  of  the  province  or  the  Do- 
minion Ministry.  The  method  of  vetoing  or  consent- 
ing to  provincial  laws  is  the  same  as  that  described 


Self-Governing  Colonies  291 

for  the  Dominion,  except  that  the  Governor-General 
stands  in  the  place  of  the  King  and  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor  in  that  of  the  Governor-General,  and  the 
period  during  which  the  provincial  law  may  be  vetoed 
or  allowed  to  die  of  neglect  by  the  Governor-General 
is  one  year  instead  of  two.  The  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor  of  a  Canadian  province  in  fact  represents  the 
Governor-General  rather  than  the  King.  Provincial 
laws  involving  grave  imperial  interests  may  be  sent 
to  England  for  the  consideration  of  the  King  (i.  e. 
Ministry),  but  the  Canadians  object  so  seriously  that 
it  is  rarely  done.1 

The  actual  executive  is  the  Ministry  of  the  Pro- 
vince, similar  in  its  small  sphere  to  that  of  England 
or  the  Dominion,  after  which  it  is  modelled.  They 
must  resign  when  out  of  sympathy  with  the  provin- 
cial legislature,  unless  by  a  dissolution  they  can 
obtain  a  new  house  to  support  them. 

Yukon  has  not  yet  developed  a  responsible  min- 
istry, though  the  Commissioner,  as  the  executive  is 
called,  is  expected  to  govern  in  accord  with  public 
opinion,  and  may  dissolve  the  little  legislature  of  ten 
members  and  call  for  a  new  election  to  ascertain  this. 2 

THE  COMMONWEALTH  OF  AUSTRALIA 

Nature  of  the  Commonwealth.  The  next  oldest 
of  the  colonial  federations  is  that  of  Australia,  which 

1  British  North  America  Act,  section  90;  Keith,  ii.,  725-32, 1009. 

2  Keith's  Responsible  Government  in  the  Dominions,  ii.,  767. 


292  Empire  and  Colonies 

went  into  operation  in  1901.  It  includes  Tasmania 
as  a  member,  one  Australian  territory  not  yet  ad- 
mitted to  membership,  and  controls  the  neighbouring 
British  possession  of  Papua.  The  members,  called 
"States,"  form  a  union  which  is  modelled  much  more 
upon  the  government  of  the  United  States  of  America 
than  is  that  of  Canada.  In  fact,  it  is  a  striking 
example  of  the  fusion  of  the  distinctive  features  of 
the  English  and  American  systems.  As  in  the  United 
States,  the  powers  of  the  central  (or  "  Common- 
wealth") government  are  enumerated  and  all  other 
powers  are  reserved  to  the  "States,"  though  the 
powers  granted  to  the  federal  government  are  more 
extensive  and  touch  more  intimately  the  daily  lives 
of  the  people  than  is  the  case  in  our  American  federal 
republic.  "State  rights,"  however,  are  jealously 
guarded.  In  fact  the  Australian  Supreme  Court 
regularly  speaks  of  the  "sovereignty"  of  the  State 
alongside  the  "sovereignty"  of  the  Commonwealth.1 
Decisions  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 
are  quoted  freely  by  the  Australian  courts  in  their 
bearing  upon  the  principles  of  federal  government. 

The  "  Federal  "  Parliament  of  the  Commonwealth 
consists  of  a  House  of  Representatives  elected  for 
three  years  in  proportion  to  population  and  a  Senate 
of  six  members  from  each  State  elected,  one  half  at 
a  time,  for  six  years.  A  prolonged  disagreement 

1  Keith,  ii.,  809. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  293 

between  the  two  houses  may  be  settled  by  dissolv- 
ing both  and  appealing  to  the  people  in  an  election 
of  new  members.  In  all  elections,  State  and  federal, 
men  and  women  vote  on  equal  terms. 

The  Governor-General  and  the  Ministry.  The 
executive  of  the  Australian  Commonwealth  is  similar 
to  that  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  the  nominal 
executive  being  the  Governor-General  sent  from 
England,  and  the  real  executive  the  Australian  Pre- 
mier and  Ministry  responsible  to  the  Commonwealth 
House  of  Representatives. 

The  Veto.  The  Governor-General  may  refuse 
his  assent  to  acts  of  the  Commonwealth  Parliament 
or  reserve  acts  for  the  consideration  of  the  King  (i.  e. 
the  British  Ministry),  in  the  same  way  as  described 
on  page  284  for  the  Governor-General  of  Canada, 
except  that  the  time  limit  for  the  veto  is  one  year 
instead  of  two.  A  bill  neither  signed  nor  vetoed 
dies  by  neglect  at  the  end  of  two  years,  as  in 
Canada.1 

Though  the  veto  is  more  often  used  in  Australia 
than  in  Canada,  its  employment  in  either  Common- 
wealth or  State  government  is  rare. 

The  State  Governments.  Each  of  the  six  States 
has  a  two-chambered  legislature  and  a  Ministry 
responsible  to  the  lower  house.  The  States  jeal- 
ously maintain  their  rights  against  the  federal 

1  Keith,  ii.,  966,  1015,  and  1019. 


294  Empire  and  Colonies 

government,  and  are  much  more  independent  than 
the  provinces  of  Canada. 

/The  nominal  executive  is  the  Governor,  appointed 
directly  by  the  Crown  (i.  e.  the  Secretary  of  State 
for  Colonies).  The  functions  of  the  Governor  and 
King  in  the  signing  or  vetoing  of  State  laws  are  the 
same  as  described  on  page  290  for  the  Governor- 
General  of  Canada.  The  Governor-General  has 
no  veto  over  State  laws.1 

The  Commonwealth  Supreme  Court.  The  Aus- 
tralian, or  as  it  is  called,  the  Commonwealth  Supreme 
Court,  enjoys  a  greater  authority  than  that  of  Canada; 
for  it  is  created  by  the  Constitution  and  is  recognized 
as  a  co-ordinate  branch  of  the  government  with  the 
legislative,  as  is  the  judicial  department  in  America; 
while  the  Canadian  court  is  created  and  its  rights  are 
defined  by  the  Dominion  Parliament  and  is  clearly 
subordinate  to  the  Parliament. 

The  Commonwealth  Supreme  Court  declares  null 
acts  of  either  the  Commonwealth  or  the  State  legis- 
latures because  contrary  to  the  Constitution,  i.e. 
1 '  The  Commonwealth  of  Australia  Constitution  Act. " 
Only  with  the  consent  of  the  Supreme  Court  can 
appeal  be  taken  to  the  Privy  Council  in  London 
"upon  any  question,  howsoever  arising,  as  to  the 
limits  inter  se  of  the  constitutional  powers  of  the 
Commonwealth  and  those  of  any  State  or  States,  or 

1  Keith,  ii.,  1013-16. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  295 

as  to  the  limits  inter  se  of  the  Constitutional  powers 
of  any  two  or  more  States. " 

Let  us  carefully  note  that  the  prohibition  of  appeal 
to  the  Privy  Council  is  forbidden  only  in  cases  touch- 
ing the  relations  of  the  Commonwealth  and  the  States. 
It  would  therefore  appear  that  matters  of  law  not 
raising  constitutional  questions  might  still  be  carried 
to  that  tribunal.  It  is  in  fact  provided  that,  "except 
as  provided  in  this  section,  this  Constitution  shall  not 
impair  any  right  which  the  Queen  may  be  pleased  to 
exercise  by  virtue  of  Her  Royal  prerogative  to  grant 
special  leave  of  appeal  from  the  High  Court1  to  Her 
Majesty  in  Council."  It  is  provided,  however, 
that  the  Australian  Parliament  may  by  statute  limit 
this  right  of  appeal,  but  that  such  laws  shall  be  sent 
to  England  for  the  approval  of  the  sovereign,  i.  e. 
the  British  Ministry. 2 

Appeals  on  constitutional  questions  can  go  from 
the  State  courts  only  to  the  Commonwealth  Supreme 
Court,  though  on  some  matters  not  constitutional 
appeal  may  be  carried  from  the  State  courts  to  the 
English  Privy  Council. 

Amending  the  Constitution.  The  method  of  amend- 
ing the  Commonwealth  Constitution  offers  too  sug- 
gestive a  lesson  in  federal  government  to  be  over- 

1  The  title  of  the  Australian  Supreme  Court. 

'Australian  Constitution  Act,  Chapter  III,  Section  74.  Cf. 
Egerton's  Federations  and  Unions  in  the  British  Empire,  58, 67, 212- 
13  and  notes. 


296  Empire  and  Colonies 

looked.  To  many  Americans,  accustomed  to  the 
unusual  rigidity  of  our  own  Constitution,  the  Aus- 
tralian process  will  appear  to  permit  a  dangerous 
instability;  to  others  it  will  appear  to  offer  a  model 
towards  which  we  should  at  least  in  some  degree  in- 
cline. If  both  houses  propose  an  amendment  by  a 
simple  majority,  or  if  one  house  thus  passes  it  twice 
in  not  less  than  three  months  in  the  same  or  the  suc- 
ceeding session,  it  must  be  submitted  to  a  popular 
vote.  It  is  ratified  by  a  mere  majority  of  the  total 
vote,  provided  it  also  has  a  majority  in  more  than 
half  the  States.  Senator  La  Follette  in  fact  in  1912 
introduced  in  Congress  an  amendment  to  adopt  this 
plan  for  amending  our  federal  Constitution.1  This 
is  doubtless  erring  almost  as  badly  on  one  extreme  as 
does  our  present  constitutional  method  on  the  other, 
by  which  it  is  possible  for  the  thirteen  smallest  States 
containing  about  a  forty-fourth  of  the  country's 
population  to  defeat  an  amendment  demanded  by 
practically  the  whole  country.  Of  course  the  thir- 
teen smallest  States  will  never  range  themselves  in 
this  way ;  but  none  the  less  it  is  to  be  doubted  whether 
any  amendment  to  the  American  Constitution  can 
secure  adoption  until  after  it  has  long  been  demanded 
by  an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  people. 

1  Australian  Commonwealth  Constitution,  Chapter  VIII.;  Beard's 
American  Government  and  Politics,  63. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  297 

THE  UNION  OF  SOUTH  AFRICA 

The  Union  Parliament.  This  latest  colonial  union, 
dating  from  1910,  consists  of  the  four  southernmost 
provinces  of  Africa — the  only  ones  inhabited  largely 
by  white  men — and  provides  for  the  eventual  ad- 
mission of  Rhodesia.  The  Union  Parliament  con- 
sists of  a  House  of  Representatives  elected  by  the 
people  and  a  Senate  of  eight  members  elected  from 
each  of  the  four  provinces  of  South  Africa,  and  eight 
more  members  for  the  entire  union  appointed  by 
the  Governor-General  on  the  advice  of  his  Ministry, 
making  a  total  of  forty.  A  deadlock  between  the 
houses  may  be  settled  by  appealing  to  the  people 
by  a  dissolution  and  new  election  of  both.  Negroes 
are  excluded  from  politics,  except  that  some  can 
vote  by  meeting  an  educational  qualification  in  the 
province  of  Cape  of  Good  Hope.1 

Governor-General  and  Ministry.  These  parts 
of  the  government  of  South  Africa  are  much  the 
same  as  have  been  described  for  Canada  and  Austra- 
lia. The  Ministry  is  responsible  to  the  lower  house. 
The  law  on  the  veto  by  the  Governor- General  or 
King  is  the  same  as  described  on  page  284  for 

1  Keith,  ii.,  962;  South  Africa  Act,  section  35;  Egerton's  Federa- 
tions and  Unions  in  the  British  Empire,  246,  n.  A  few  negroes  may 
theoretically  but  hardly  practically  vote  in  Natal,  and  negroes  may 
theoretically  but  not  practically  be  elected  to  the  assembly  of  Cape 
of  Good  Hope. 


298  Empire  and  Colonies 

Canada,  except  that  the  time  limit  is  one  year  instead 
of  two.1 

Provincial  Governments.  The  Governor-General 
(i.  e.  the  South  African  Ministry)  appoints  an 
" Administrator"  for  each  of  the  four  provinces  who 
is  much  more  of  a  real  executive  than  is  the  provin- 
cial Lieutenant-Governor  in  Canada  or  the  State 
Governor  in  Australia.  Each  province  has  an 
elected  Assembly,  but  of  much  less  extensive 
powers  than  the  similar  bodies  in  the  other  two 
confederations,  and  there  is  no  provincial  responsible 
Ministry.2 

Canada,  Australia,  and  South  Africa  Contrasted. 
Thus  we  have  in  the  three  great  self-governing 
colonial  confederations  within  the  British  Empire 
three  widely  varying  types  of  federal  government. 
The  understanding  of  the  profound  and  extensive 
benefits  of  that  system  and  its  wonderful  fitness  for 
solving  or  preventing  some  of  the  most  serious  difficul- 
ties involved  in  governing  wide-spreading  dominions 
had  not  come  generally  to  be  so  well  understood 
outside  the  United  States  at  the  time  of  the  adop- 
tion of  the  British  North  America  Act  of  1867.  It 
is  probable  too  that  the  framers  of  the  Act,  in  the 
somewhat  strained  relations  then  existing  between 
England  and  the  United  States,  were  not  unmindful 
of  the  possibility  of  Canada's  needing  at  some  time 

1  Keith,  ii.,  966,  1016.  2  Keith,  ii.,  967  el  seq. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  299 

the  organization  necessary  for  prompt  and  vigorous 
action  in  defence  of  British  interests  against  her 
powerful  neighbour  to  the  southwards.  Hence 
Canada  was  given  a  powerful,  close-knit  central 
government  under  which  the  provinces  are  merely 
what  their  name  indicates — provinces,  though  very 
happy  and  highly  privileged  provinces. 

In  the  case  of  Australia  neither  of  the  considera- 
tions applied  which  led  in  Canada  to  the  central 
government's  being  given  such  predominance.  She 
is  removed  from  the  danger  of  aggression  by  power- 
ful neighbours.  By  1901  the  experience  of  the 
United  States  and  Switzerland,  re-enforced  by  the 
success  of  the  federal  German  Empire  since  1871, 
had  exhibited  to  the  world  more  impressively  than 
ever  the  possibilities  of  the  federal  idea.  Moreover 
that  idea  had  by  that  time  taken  powerful  hold  upon 
English  opinion  as  offering  perhaps  a  solution  of  the 
problem  of  the  unity  and  permanency  of  the  Empire. 
Australia  therefore  presents  almost  as  thorough- 
going an  illustration  of  the  true  federal  state  as  does 
its  great  American  prototype.  The  more  independ- 
ent and  dignified  position  of  the  Australian  ''State" 
is  seen  in  the  fact  that  not  the  Governor-General, 
but  only  the  King  (i.  e.  the  British  Ministry),  can 
veto  a  law  passed  by  a  "State"  legislature  and 
Governor,  while  in  Canada  not  only  the  King  (i.  e. 
the  British  Ministry),  but  the  Governor-General 


300  Empire  and  Colonies 

also,  has  this  control  over  the  provincial  legislatures. x 
Again,  the  Governor  of  an  Australian  "State"  is 
appointed  by  the  King  (i.  e.  the  British  Ministry), 
and  is  his  immediate  representative,  whereas  the 
Governor  of  a  Canadian  province  is  appointed  by 
the  Governor-General  and  represents  him  rather 
than  the  sovereign. 

The  circumstances  of  South  Africa  are  quite  differ- 
ent from  those  of  the  other  two,  and  hence  her 
constitution  possesses  its  own  peculiar  character. 
Australia  presents  strong  and  vigorous  State  and 
federal  governments,  with  the  emphasis  on  the 
autonomy  of  the  State;  Canada  presents  the  same, 
with,  however,  a  decided  emphasis  on  the  central 
government;  and  South  Africa  amounts  almost  to 
a  supreme  central  government  with  the  provinces 
as  subdivisions  for  limited  purposes  of  local  legisla- 
tion. Some  authorities  consider  that  it  is  so  highly 
centralized  as  hardly  to  be  considered  a  federation. 
The  reason  for  this  is  the  necessity  of  united  strength 
in  the  face  of  the  racial  and  other  dangers  which 
threaten  these  provinces. 

The  consolidated  character  of  the  South  African 
government  is  illustrated  too  in  its  judiciary,  which 
is  not  called  upon  to  draw  the  delicate  and  dangerous 
line  between  central  power  and  state  rights.  :<The 
government,"  says  Egerton,  "being  a  union  and  not 

1  Keith,  ii.,  1013-16. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  301 

a  federation,  and  the  powers  of  Parliament,  within 
certain  limitations,  being  absolute,  the  Supreme 
Court  will  not  play  the  leading  part  that  it  does  in 
the  great  federations;  but  there  will  be  considerable 
convenience  in  the  abolition  of  four  independent 
Supreme  Courts,  none  of  which  was  bound  by  the 
decisions  of  the  other/'1  Though  no  litigant  pos- 
sesses the  right  of  appeal  from  the  South  African 
Supreme  Court,  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council  may  grant  in  any  case  special  leave  of  appeal 
to  itself;  but  this  may  be  limited  by  act  of  the  South 
African  Parliament,  with  the  condition  that  such 
laws  must  be  reserved  for  the  royal  approval. 

These  great  republics,  Canada  and  Australia, 
each  about  equal  in  size  to  the  United  States,  and 
South  Africa  eventually  to  equal  more  than  one 
third  as  much,  and  sure  to  increase  greatly  in  wealth 
and  population,  thus  present  three  vast  experiments 
in  varying  applications  of  the  federalizing  and  cen- 
tralizing principles.  The  results  will  be  watched  by 
all  the  world  with  intense  interest  in  their  bearing 
on  some  of  the  most  momentous  problems  of  organ- 
ized government. 

OTHER  SELF-GOVERNING   COLONIES 

Newfoundland  and  New  Zealand.  So  far  has  the 
process  of  confederation  gone  where  the  character 

1  Egerton's  Federations  and  Unions  in  the  British  Empire,  266,  n. 


302  Empire  and  .Colonies 

of  the  population  and  the  geographical  situation 
make  it  practicable  that,  besides  the  colonies  in  con- 
federations described  above,  we  have  left  of  the  fully 
self-governing  class  only  Newfoundland  and  New 
Zealand.  The  latter,  on  account  of  its  importance, 
is  now  ranked  as  a  "  Dominion,"  along  with  the  three 
great  confederations  of  colonies  already  described. 

It  is  necessary  to  say  little  in  addition  regarding 
Newfoundland  and  New  Zealand.  The  nominal 
chief  executive  is  the  Governor,  appointed  by  the 
Crown  (i.  e.  the  Colonial  Secretary  in  the  British 
Ministry),  and  representing  the  authority  of  the 
British  Government  and  the  unity  of  the  Empire. 
He  is  generally  an  Englishman,  but  practically  every 
other  position  in  a  self-governing  colony  is  filled 
from  the  inhabitants,  either  by  the  people  themselves 
or  by  some  appointing  power  in  the  colonial  govern- 
ment.1 The  relations  between  the  Governor,  the 
responsible  Ministry  of  the  colony,  and  the  colonial 
legislature  are  the  same  as  already  described  for 
Canada,  etc.  The  Governor,  however,  is  rather 
freer  to  refuse  his  assent  to  laws  than  in  the  great 
confederations  of  colonies. 

The  legislature  consists  of  two  houses,  one  ap- 
pointed by  the  Crown  from  the  colonial  citizenship 
and  one  elected  by  the  people,  with  the  superior 
power  in  the  latter. 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  418-19. 


Self-Governing  Colonies  303 

Loyalty  versus  Compulsion.  It  would  be  a  mis- 
take to  suppose  that  the  diminution  of  control  by 
the  mother-country  has  lessened  the  bonds  of  alle- 
giance between  herself  and  this  wonderful  sisterhood 
of  self-governing  countries.  On  the  contrary,  the 
loss  of  the  thirteen  American  colonies  and  some 
later  rebellions  made  it  evident  that  in  seeking  to 
exercise  too  much  control  the  home  government, 
as  Benjamin  Franklin  put  it,  was  following  the  pro- 
per "rules  by  which  a  great  empire  may  be  reduced 
to  a  small  one."  Loyalty  is  stronger  than  compul- 
sion, and  the  unity  of  the  Empire  has  increased  in 
proportion  as  its  parts  have  been  allowed  to  manage 
their  own  affairs.  The  possibility  of  binding  the 
whole  together  in  some  system  of  central  govern- 
ment for  affairs  of  common  interest  in  which  the 
mother-country  and  colonies  shall  all  participate 
will  be  discussed  under  the  subject  of  imperial 
federation.1 ' 

^See  pages  329-34. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 

CROWN  COLONIES 

Definition.  A  Crown  colony  is  one  in  whose 
government  the  power  of  the  King  (i.  e.  of  the  Brit- 
ish Ministry) ,  is  real  and  constant  through  its  control 
over  part  or  all  of  the  colonial  officials,  instead  of 
being  for  most  purposes  little  more  than  a  mere  ad- 
vising influence  as  in  the  self-governing  colonies. 
The  constitution  of  the  Crown  colony  may  be  ex- 
pressed either  in  a  charter  or  in  a  set  of  instructions 
from  the  sovereign  or  in  an  act  of  Parliament.  It 
is  not  this,  but  the  degree  of  authority  exercised  by 
the  Crown,  that  determines  its  class. 

First  Group:  Largely  Self-governing.  Though 
the  degree  of  self-government  allowed  Crown  colo- 
nies varies  greatly,  we  may  fairly  set  them  off  into 
three  groups.  First,  there  are  those  which  are 
largely  self-governing.  The  Governor,  who  in  colo- 
nies of  all  kinds  is  appointed  by  the  King,  has  in 
these  the  free  use  of  the  veto  and  other  executive 
powers.  The  legislature  consists  of  two  houses, 

304 


Crown  Colonies  305 

the  consent  of  both  being  necessary  for  the  passage 
of  a  law.  The  upper  house  is  appointed  by  the  King 
and  insists  on  its  co-ordinate  rights  in  law-making. 
The  lower  house  is  elected  by  the  people.  It  is 
thus  impossible  for  either  element  to  enforce  an 
unwelcome  law  over  the  other.  The  upper  house 
can  defeat  any  measure  hostile  to  the  interests  of 
the  Empire  at  large,  and  the  lower  can  likewise 
protect  the  interests  of  the  inhabitants  of  that  parti- 
cular colony,  though  they  cannot  without  the  consent 
of  the  other  house  enact  laws  which  are  demanded 
by  its  needs.  This  is  readily  recognized  as  the  form 
of  government  in  a  royal  province  in  America  before 
the  Revolution.  It  remains,  now,  however,  in  this 
pure  form  only  in  three  instances — Barbados,  the 
Bermudas,  and  the  Bahamas. 

Second  Group:  Crown  Rules  with  People's  Co- 
operation. The  second  group  of  Crown  colonies 
consists  of  those  in  which  the  Crown  retains  full 
control,  but  associates  with  itself  representatives  of 
the  people  whose  advice  and  information  are  often 
of  great  influence.  Such  a  Crown  colony  has  a 
Governor  and  a  Council  with  law-making  power, 
a  majority  of  whose  members  are  appointed  by  the 
Crown  and  a  minority  of  whom  are  elected  by  the 
people.  These  are  the  colonies  in  which  represen- 
tative self-government  cannot  be  allowed  on  account 
of  the  ignorance  of  the  population  or  the  military 


20 


306  Empire  and  Colonies 

necessities  of  the  situation.    Jamaica  has  a  govern- 
ment of  this  sort. 
Third  Group :  Government  by  Crown  Alone.    The 

third  group  of  Crown  colonies  consists  of  mere  mili- 
tary posts  like  Gibraltar  or  barbarous  regions  like 
Central  Africa,  in  which  the  prompt  exercise  of 
untrammelled  authority  is  necessary.  In  these  the 
Governor's  power  is  independent  of  any  Council. 

The  Veto.  The  Crown,  of  course,  possesses  the 
right  of  veto  over  the  acts  of  the  legislatures  of  Crown 
colonies  as  over  those  of  self-governing  colonies, 
but  with  two  important  differences.  First,  in  a 
Crown  colony  the  King  (i.  e.  the  British  Ministry) 
can,  in  some  cases,  veto  parts  of  laws  without  killing 
the  whole  law.  Second,  except  in  a  few  cases,  the 
King  (i.  e.  the  British  Ministry)  can  veto  an  act 
of  the  legislature  of  a  Crown  colony  at  any  time,  and 
is  not  limited  to  doing  so  within  one  or  two  years, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  self-governing  colonies.1  This 
applies,  of  course,  only  to  new  laws;  for  after  the 
King  has  once  signed  a  law,  it  cannot  be  undone 
except  by  a  new  law  repealing  the  former  one. 

Difficulties.  It  seems  that  the  best  results  are 
obtained  at  the  two  extremes  of  the  colonial  system, 
i.  e.  in  the  great  self-governing  colonies  and  in  the 
Crown  colonies  which  are  administered  by  the  Gov- 
ernor and  an  appointed  Council.2  In  the  first  there 

1  Keith,  ii.,  1019-20.  3  Lowell,  ii.f  416. 


Crown  Colonies  307 

is  no  strife,  because  the  Crown  recognizes  that  it 
can  hope  to  accomplish  anything  only  by  reasonable 
advice,  and  the  legislature  of  the  colony  is  accord- 
ingly not  likely  to  become  alarmed,  resentful,  or 
quarrelsome.  In  the  colony  whose  inhabitants 
have  no  representation  or  only  a  minority  upon  the 
legislative  Council,  the  Governor  is  not  likely  to 
become  angry  or  to  seek  by  sudden  and  violent  poli- 
cies to  checkmate  opposition,  as  he  is  secure  against 
being  overridden  and  hence  is  the  more  ready  to  wel- 
come the  reasonable  advice  of  the  inhabitants.  The 
conflicts  in  American  colonial  history  because  of  the 
efforts  of  the  royal  and  popular  elements  to  gain 
supremacy  where  governmental  power  was  divided 
between  them  are  often  reproduced  now  in  the  colo- 
nies which  are  still  under  that  system.  Where 
either  side  may  hope  for  victory  and  yet  recognizes 
that  it  may  be  defeated,  each  will  be  jealous  of  the 
power  which  it  has  and  always  on  the  alert  to  seize 
more. 

The  Colonial  Civil  Service.  The  administrative 
offices  in  the  self-governing  colonies  are  of  course 
filled  by  the  colonists  themselves  by  the  rules  which 
they  choose  to  adopt.  In  the  Crown  colonies  there 
are  many  positions  which  are  filled  by  men  sent  out 
from  the  British  Isles.  The  time  is  long  past  when 
these  places  were  treated  as  rewards  for  politicians 
or  shiftless  sons  of  the  nobility,  and  the  colonial 


308  Empire  and  Colonies 

civil  service  today  is  organized  on  the  principle  of 
merit.  Young  men  enter  the  lower  ranks  by  com- 
petitive examination  and  seek  by  efficiency  and 
character  to  win  the  approval  of  their  superiors  and 
the  respect  of  the  colonists.  The  Governors  are 
usually  chosen  from  among  the  men  who  have  proved 
their  ability  in  the  more  responsible  colonial  posi- 
tions. Some  of  the  finest  examples  of  English  states- 
manship have  been  afforded  by  the  work  of  such 
empire  builders  as  Lord  Clive  in  India,  Cecil  Rhodes 
in  South  Africa,  and  Earl  Cromer  in  Egypt,  the  first 
and  last  named  of  whom  were  given  their  titles  for 
their  achievements.  The  spirit  of  loyalty  to  the 
service  is  intense,  and  many  a  bright  young  man 
puts  forth  his  best  efforts  in  emulation  of  the  deeds 
of  these  great  leaders  in  the  hope  perhaps  of  earning 
a  knighthood  or  a  title  of  nobility. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

INDIA — PROTECTORATES 

The  Indian  Empire.  India  is  not  legally  classed 
as  a  colony.  It  is  in  fact  an  empire  in  itself  and 
is  recognized  as  such  by  the  British  government. 
Hence  the  title  of  the  English  sovereign  is  King  of 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland  and  Emperor  of  India, 
and  his  official  signature,  " George  R.  &  I." — Rex 
et  Imperator.1 

Discordant  Racial  Elements.  India  is  equal  in 
area  to  almost  two  thirds  of  the  United  States  and 
contains  over  315,000,000  people.  Though  an  em- 
pire in  extent  and  population,  it  is  not  a  nation,  but 
on  the  contrary  is  a  conglomeration  of  races,  lan- 
guages, and  religions  which  divide  it  into  many 
distinct  and  jealous  peoples.2  It  is  this  absence 

*The  exact  legal  title  of  the  reigning  sovereign  is  "George  V., 
by  the  Grace  of  God  of  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland  and  of  the  British  Dominions  beyond  the  Seas  King,  De- 
fender of  the  Faith,  Emperor  of  India." 

aln  1911  the  Indo-European  Indians,  or  Aryans  (i.  e.  those 
whose  race  is  akin  to  the  ra°es  of  Europe,  though  mingled  in  various 

309 


310  Empire  and  Colonies 

of  any  common  race  unity  or  national  patriotism 
which  has  made  it  possible  for  the  country  to  be 
conquered  by  a  comparatively  small  number  of  Eng- 
lishmen. Though  many  educated  Indians  desire 
independence,  or  at  least  self-government  on  some 
such  plan  as  enjoyed  by  Canada,  Australia,  or  South 
Africa,  yet  many  of  them  fear  that  this  would  lead 
to  control  and  consequent  tyranny  by  some  powerful 
racial  or  religious  element.  These  jealousies  are 
so  strong  that,  whatever  changes  the  near  future 
may  bring,  there  is  little  likelihood  of  any  system 
in  which  England  will  be  without  the  moderating 
and  directing  authority. 

Degree  of  Parliamentary  Control.  Though  the 
British  Parliament  has  legally  the  same  unlimited 
sovereignty  over  India  as  over  any  other  part  of  the 
Empire  or  over  England  itself,  it  wisely  chooses  to 
leave  the  government  of  the  great  dependency  in 
the  hands  of  experienced  men  who  know  from  long 
residence  there  her  peculiar  problems  and  difficulties. 
Having  prescribed  the  form  of  government,  Parlia- 

degrees  with  that  of  the  dark-skinned  aborigines)  equalled  232,820,- 
ooo;  the  Dravidians  (ranging  from  almost  black  when  pure  to 
light  when  mixed  with  Aryans),  62,720,000.  The  latter  are  mainly 
in  the  south.  The  Aryans,  having  pushed  in  from  the  north-west, 
occupy  the  northern  bulk  of  India. 

There  were  in  1911  217,586,892  Hindus,  66,647,299  Moham- 
medans, 10,721,453  Buddhists,  10,295,168  Animists,  3,876,203 
Christians,  3,014,466  Sikhs,  1,248,182  Jains.  Other  religious 
sects  are  insignificant. — Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915,  128,  131. 


India — Protectorates  31 1 

ment  rarely  interferes  further  than  to  control  the 
general  policy  or  relations  of  India  toward  the  rest 
of  the  Empire  or  the  outside  world.  Parliament, 
says  Sir  Courtenay  Ilbert,  not  only  passes  few  laws  for 
India,  but  in  legislating  for  that  country  uses  "wide 
and  general  terms,  leaving  all  details  and  some  im- 
portant matters  of  principle  to  be  determined  by 
regulations  and  rules  made  by  the  authorities  in 
India/1 ' 

[;  The  Secretary  of  State  for  India.  The  immediate 
agent  of  communication  between  Parliament  and 
this  great  dependency  is  the  Secretary  of  State  for 
India,  who  is  a  member  of  the  Cabinet  and  so  directly 
responsible  to  the  House  of  Commons.  He  resides, 
of  course,  in  London.  He  is  the  supreme  authority 
in  the  administration  of  India  and  can  issue  such 
orders  as  he  sees  fit,  within  the  bounds  of  law,  to 
the  officials  throughout  that  country.  Though  he 
may  veto  any  act  of  an  Indian  Legislative  Council, 
he  rarely  does  so.2 

The  Secretary  of  State's  Council  for  India.  The 
Secretary  is  assisted  by  a  Council,  consisting  of 
fourteen  members  appointed  by  himself,  nine  of 
whom  must  have  recently  resided  at  least  ten  years 
in  India,  and  two  of  whom  are  natives.  The  expen- 

1  Journal  of  Comparative  Legislation,  n,  245. 
a  Rt.  Hon.  Syed  Ameer  All  in  Nineteenth  Century  and  After,  67, 
402. 


312  Empire  and  Colonies 

diture  of  Indian  revenues  must  receive  their  approval, 
and  Indian  affairs  in  general  are  submitted  to  their 
discussion,  though  not  control.  In  matters  of  peace 
and  war,  foreign  affairs,  relations  with  native  states, T 
and  those  requiring  secrecy  and  dispatch,  the  Secre- 
tary may  act  without  consulting  the  Council.  The 
purpose  of  the  latter  is  thus  to  supply  advice,  warn- 
ing, suggestion,  and  the  supervision  of  a  sort  of 
prudential  body  of  opinion  without  hampering  the 
freedom  and  responsibility  of  administration. 

The  Viceroy.  We  may  now  consider  ourselves 
transferred  to  the  territory  of  India  itself.  Over 
the  whole  country  is  an  English  official,  usually  a 
great  nobleman,  entitled  the  "Viceroy  and  Governor- 
General."  He  is  appointed  by  the  Crown  for  a 
term  of  five  years,  resides  in  India,  and  represents 
the  sovereign.  His  selection  rests,  of  course,  not 
with  the  King,  but  with  the  Prime  Minister.  He 
consults  with  the  Secretary  of  State  for  India;  but 
the  responsibility  for  this  great  appointment  is  the 
Premier's.  On  the  accession  of  a  new  King  in  Eng- 
land, the  Viceroy  celebrates  the  sovereign's  accession 
as  Emperor  of  India  in  a  magnificent  pageant  called 
the  durbar,  similar  to  the  royal  coronation  in  Lon- 
don, in  which  turbaned  sepoys  with  their  flashing 
arms,  bejewelled  princes  riding  on  elegantly  capa- 
risoned elephants,  and  all  the  blaze  of  oriental  colour 

1  For  the  meaning  of  "native  states,"  see  page  325. 


India — Protectorates  313 

are  employed  to  stir  in  the  people  a  sense  of  reverence 
and  pride  towards  the  successor  of  the  Grand  Mogul. 

King  George  V  and  his  Queen,  themselves,  visited 
India  and  held  the  durbar,  with  excellent  results. 

The  Governor-General  in  Council.  The  Viceroy, 
or,  as  he  is  commonly  called,  the  Governor-General, 
has  an  Executive  Council  of  eight  members  besides 
himself  appointed  by  the  Crown  (i.  e.  by  the  Secre- 
tary of  State  for  India),  one  of  whom  is  a  native. 
Subject  to  the  ultimate  authority  of  the  British 
Government,  supreme  executive  power  over  all 
India  rests  with  "The  Governor-General  in  Council." 
He  may  veto  the  acts  of  the  Central  Legislative 
Council1  or  of  any  Provincial  Legislative  Council,2 
and  important  laws  or  expenditures  of  the  latter 
must  receive  his  approval.  Although  he  usually 
acts  in  accord  with  the  advice  of  his  Executive 
Council,  he  can  disregard  them  and  follow  his  own 
opinion.  The  responsibility  assumed  by  a  Governor- 
General,  in  India  for  only  a  few  years  even  if  reap- 
pointed  after  his  five-year  term,  who  chooses  thus 
to  act  on  his  own  opinions  in  defiance  of  those  who 
have  grown  old  in  the  service,  is  so  overwhelming 
that  only  a  man  of  great  courage  or  great  rashness 
will  assume  it.  Yet  it  is  the  Governor-Generals 
who  know  how  and  dare  to  use  their  personal  author- 
ity in  proper  measure  who  accomplish  reforms  and 

1  See  page  314.  2  See  page  317. 


314  Empire  and  Colonies 

leave  their  marks  on  Indian  progress.  But  it  is  also 
true  that  they  frequently  confer  their  great  benefits 
upon  the  ignorant  and  prejudiced  masses  of  the 
Indian  people  at  the  peril  of  serious  discontent  at 
the  change  of  ancient  custom. 

The  fact  that  a  great  deal  that  falls  into  the  control 
of  the  Legislature  at  home  is  assigned  to  the  executive 
in  India  makes  the  Governor-General's  power  for 
good  or  evil  immense,  and  raises  his  office  to  a  posi- 
tion of  almost  unexampled  responsibility. 

The  Legislative  Council  of  India.  Law-making 
power  for  this  vast  empire  rests  with  a  Legislative 
Council  consisting  of  sixty-eight  members. x  Twenty- 
five  are  elected  directly  or  indirectly  by  the  natives. 
The  others  consist  of  the  eight  Executive  Council- 
lors and  in  addition  thirty-five  members  appointed 
by  the  Governor-General  in  such  a  way  as  to  secure 
representation  for  the  various  interests  and  classes 
of  the  population.  Twenty-eight  of  the  latter  must 
be  officials.  These,  added  to  the  eight  Executive 
Councillors,  give  the  officials  a  majority  of  four;  so 
that  in  the  last  resort  the  English  element  by  acting 
together  can  exercise  control. 

The  Governor-General  may  forbid  the  candidature 

1  The  Rt.  Hon.  Syed  Ameer  Ali,  in  The  Nineteenth  Century  and 
After,  67,  401,  n.,  says  "68,  inclusive  of  the  Viceroy."  But  Sir 
Courtenay  Ilbert's  statement  (Journal  of  the  Society  of  Comparative 
Legislation,  n,  246),  that  there  are  68  exclusive  of  the  Viceroy, 
seems  clearly  correct. 


India — Protectorates  315 

among  the  elected  members  of  any  one  whom  he 
considers  dangerous  to  the  Imperial  interests.  Not- 
withstanding this  and  the  limitations  described  in 
the  next  section,  the  Legislative  Council  is  a  most 
valuable  means  of  bringing  native  aspirations  and 
the  views  of  different  minds,  English  and  native, 
to  bear  upon  the  shaping  of  the  laws. 

The  Powers  of  the  Legislative  Council  of  India, 
though  far  in  advance  of  what  Indians  have  ever 
enjoyed,  are  quite  limited.  They  consist  of  three 
functions,  (a)  legislative,  (b)  deliberative,  and  (c) 
interrogatory. 

(a)  The  Legislative  Council  possesses  really  no 
initiative  in  law-making,  but  may  simply  adopt  or 
reject  laws  that  are  proposed  to  it  by  the  Governor- 
General  or  members  of  his  Council.     Many  matters, 
moreover,  are  subject   to  determination  by  the  ex- 
ecutive without   consultation  with  the  Legislative 
Council. 

(b)  The    deliberative    functions    are    concerned, 
first  with  the  budget.1    The  estimate  of  expendi- 
tures and  necessary  taxes  to  meet  them  is  presented 
by  the  member  of  the  Executive  Council  in  charge 
of  finance.     The  provisions  for  the  army,  interest 
on  the  public  debt,  government  railways,  and  a  few 
other  services  of  supreme  necessity  cannot  be  dis- 
cussed.    With  these  exceptions,  any  member  may 

1  For  definition  of  the  budget,  see  pages  63  and  142. 


316  Empire  and  Colonies 

debate  and  may  make  any  motion  he  chooses  on 
any  item  of  the  budget.  The  votes  of  the  Council 
are  merely  advice,  which  the  executive  may  either 
accept  or  reject. 

The  second  deliberative  function  of  the  Legisla- 
tive Council  consists  of  the  right  to  debate  and  vote 
upon  resolutions  offered  by  any  member  upon  any 
subject  of  public  interest,  with  a  few  exceptions,  as, 
e.  g.,  relations  with  foreign  countries  and  native 
states.1  The  vote  of  the  Council  is  merely  advice 
to  the  executive,  which  may  be  ignored  or  may  be 
accepted  as  the  basis  for  a  bill  to  be  presented  to  the 
Council  for  enactment  into  law. 

(c)  The  interrogatory  right  permits  any  member 
of  the  Legislative  Council  to  put  any  resqectful 
question  to  the  officials  at  the  head  of  the  various 
executive  departments. 

The  Provinces.  Only  61  per  cent,  of  the  territory 
containing  78  per  cent,  of  the  population  of  the 
Indian  Empire  is  under  direct  British  administra- 
tion. The  rest,  though  under  British  sovereignty, 
is  ruled  by  native  princes.2  The  two  thirds  ruled 
directly  by  England  is  divided  into  fifteen  provinces. 
Over  each  of  the  seven  leading  provinces  there 
is  a  Governor  or  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  over 
the  eight  lesser  ones  a  Chief  Commissioner.3  The 

1  For  definition  of  native  states,  see  page  325.         a  See  pages  325~6. 
3  Bombay,  Bengal,  and   Madras  are  called  Presidencies.     Their 


India — Protectorates  31 7 

government  of  the  seven  principal  provinces  allows 
a  considerable  representation  of  native  opinion,  as 
will  be  presently  described.  The  lesser  provinces 
lie  among  the  less  developed  regions  of  the  Empire 
and  are  governed  by  their  Chief  Commissioner  or 
the  Governor  General  and  his  Executive  and  Legis- 
lative Councils  without  the  participation  of  their 
inhabitants  in  law-making. 

Councils  in  the  Provinces.  In  the  seven  leading 
provinces,  the  Governor  or  Lieutenant-Governor 
is  assisted  by  a  small  Executive  Council  including 
one  native;  and  local  law-making  is  entrusted,  to  a 
certain  extent,  to  Legislative  Councils,  over  a  third 
of  whose  members  are  elected  and  a  clear  majority 
of  whose  members  are  non-office-holding  natives.1 
The  appointed  members  are  named  by  the  chief 
executive  of  the  province,  who  may  also  forbid  the 
candidature  of  an  elective  representative  whom  he 
considers  dangerous. 

The  procedure  of  the  Provincial  Councils  regard- 
ing the  budget,  proposed  laws,  etc.,  is  similar  to  that 
of  the  Central  Legislative  Council.2 

The  functions  of  the  Provincial  Governors  and 
their  Councils  are  so  extensive  and  important,  that, 


executive  is  styled  Governor  and  is  appointed  by  the  Crown.  The 
executives  of  the  other  provinces  are  appointed  by  the  Governor- 
General. 

1  North  American  Review,  192,  373.  a  See  page  315. 


3i 8  Empire  and  Colonies 

V 

it  is  reliably  stated,  "good  or  bad  administration 
in  India  depends  to  a  greater  extent  upon  the  pro- 
vincial government  than  on  the  authorities  in  Cal- 
cutta or  London/'1 

The  Suffrage.  Indian  society  is  so  cut  up  into 
hostile  racial  and  religious  factions  that  it  is  con- 
sidered impracticable  to  apportion  representation  on 
the  basis  merely  of  population  as  in  many  western 
countries.  Accordingly,  the  members  of  the  Central 
and  Provincial  Legislative  Councils  are  elected  to 
represent  classes  and  interests,  as,  e.  g.,  the  Moham- 
medans, the  merchants,  the  farmers,  etc.  The 
qualifications  for  voting  are  complex  and  are  based 
upon  honours,  higher  education,  or  the  ownership 
of  property.  The  people  in  some  cases  elect  the 
Councillor  directly,  and  in  others  choose  electors, 
who  in  turn  elect  the  Councillor.  The  term  is  three 
years.2 

Reserved  Power  of  the  Executive.  The  Governor 
or  Lieutenant-Governor  (as  the  case  may  be)  of  the 
province  has  a  veto  on  the  acts  of  the  Legislative 
Council;  and  if  that  body  fails  to  enact  measures, 
that  he  considers  necessary,  he  may  appeal  to  the 
Legislative  Council  for  India  to  enact  the  desired 
law.  The  Viceroy  and  the  British  Government  in 

1  Political  Science  Quarterly,  xxvi.,  305.  Calcutta  was  until 
recently  the  capital  of  India;  but  Delhi,  the  ancient  Mogul  capital, 
has  again  been  made  the  seat  of  government. 

*  Journal  of  the  Society  of  Comparative  Legislation,  n,  248-51. 


India — Protectorates  319 

London  also  may  veto  any  act  of  a  provincial  legis- 
lature. In  further  limitation,  the  provincial  legisla- 
ture is  forbidden  to  deal  with  certain  subjects,  the 
handling  of  which  might  lead  to  dangerous  conse- 
quences. The  presiding  officer  in  the  Legislative 
Councils  possesses  wide  authority  to  rule  out  of 
order  any  question  or  resolution  without  assigning 
his  reasons.  The  government  of  India  is,  in  fact, 
as  has  been  well  said,  "a  compromise  between  con- 
flicting principles — the  absolutism  of  the  Mogul 
emperors  and  the  democratic  ideal  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  These  are  the  sources  of  the  British 
sovereignty  in  India,  and  certain  necessary  con- 
sequences flow  from  them."1  But  despite  these 
restrictions,  the  government  of  India  is  now  admin- 
istered in  closer  touch  with  native  opinion  than  ever 
before. 

Effects  of  Increased  Native  Power.  The  increased 
participation  of  natives  in  the  directing  authority 
of  the  government  was  enacted  by  Parliament  in 
1909  under  the  leadership  of  Secretary  of  State  for 
India  Lord  Morley  and  Viceroy  Lord  Minto,  against 
violent  criticism.  This  was  the  answer  of  the  British 
Government  to  the  demands  of  the  "  Indian  National 
Congress"2  and  the  widespread  popular  discontent 

1  Blackwood's  Magazine,  188,  706. 

3  The  Indian  National  Congress  is  a  convention  of  entirely  un- 
official character  which  has  met  annually  from  city  to  city  since 
1885.  Its  proceedings  are  in  English,  as  the  common  language 


320  Empire  and  Colonies 

during  recent  years.  Only  a  small  educated  class 
in  India  cares  for  political  power  or  is  prepared  to 
exercise  it ;  and  a  part  of  that  class  is  fully  as  selfish 
as  patriotic  in  its  aims.  Already  the  English 
members  have  had  to  protect  the  interests  of  the 
vast  mass  of  small  farmers  against  the  grasping  class 
policy  of  the  native  landlords  and  lawyers  in  the 
Legislative  Councils,  though  in  general  the  native 
members  have  co-operated  cordially  with  the  English 
official  members  in  the  tasks  of  government.1 

On  account  of  the  bitter  rivalry  between  the 
Hindus  and  Mohammedans  and  the  further  sharp 
division  into  castes,  with  the  consequent  absence  of 
the  feeling  of  community  interest,  the  cultivation 
of  the  proper  spirit  for  popular  self-government  is 
more  difficult  in  India  than  in  any  other  civilized 
country  in  the  world;  and  it  is  not  by  any  means 
certain  that  either  the  justice  or  efficiency  of  the 
government  would  for  many  years  to  come  be 
increased  by  enlarging  any  further  the  element  of 
native  control. 

The  District.  The  province  is  divided  into  dis- 
tricts, containing  on  an  average  almost  a  million 


of  the  educated  native  classes,  whose  aspirations  for  self-govern- 
ment it  voices.  The  "Moderates"  desire  a  system  similar  to  that 
of  Canada,  Australia,  or  South  Africa;  the  "Extremists"  demand 
absolute  independence. 

1  Political  Science  Quarterly,  26,  310;  Blackwood's  Magazine,  188, 
711. 


India — Protectorates  32 1 

people.  Over  the  district  is  an  English  official  who 
is  the  responsible  arm  of  the  provincial  government 
in  the  execution  of  all  its  powers,  except  the  judiciary. 
It  is  this  group  of  some  two  hundred  and  fifty  men 
who  are  the  actual  executors  of  the  vastest  system  of 
paternal  government  that  the  world  has  ever  seen, 
and  whose  fidelity  and  efficiency  are  the  basis  for 
ex-President  Roosevelt's  remark  that  "The  success- 
ful administration  of  the  Indian  Empire  by  the 
English  has  been  one  of  the  most  notable  and  admir- 
able achievements  of  the  white  race  during  the  last 
two  centuries." 

Municipal  and  Rural  Self-Government.  In  the 
administration  of  local  affairs  the  English  are  employ- 
ing more  and  more  the  services  of  the  natives.  In 
over  seven  hundred  cities1  there  are  municipal  coun- 
cils called  Committees.  In  many  of  the  smaller 
places  and  all  the  larger,  the  majority  of  the  Commit- 
tee are  elected  by  the  taxpayers.  In  all  places  a 
majority  of  the  members,  and  in  many  places  all, 
are  natives.  They  "have  the  care  of  the  lighting 
of  the  roads,  water  supply,  drainage,  sanitation, 
medical  relief,  vaccination,  and  education,  particu- 
larly primary  education;  they  impose  taxes,  enact 
by-laws,  make  improvements,  and  spend  money."2 

1  Having  a  population  aggregating  about  17,000,000. — States- 
man's Year  Book,  for  1915,  123;  Lord  Curzon  in  North  American 
Review,  cxcii.,  154. 

3  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915,  123. 


322  Empire  and  Colonies 

All  these  functions  are  performed  under  the  super- 
vision of  the  provincial  government,  which  possesses 
the  right  of  veto. 

The  same  system  exists  also  to  a  considerable 
extent  for  rural  affairs. x 

The  Indian  Civil  Service.  The  officers  of  the 
Indian  civil  service  are  selected  by  competitive 
examination  and  promoted  according  to  efficiency 
and  loyalty.  Almost  all  the  higher  positions  are 
filled  by  men  from  the  British  Isles,  though  there  is 
a  steady  tendency  to  give  more  and  more  positions 
of  responsibility  to  Indians.  Two  considerations 
with  reference  to  the  appointment  of  natives  must 
always  be  held  in  mind — the  necessity  of  keeping 
the  administration  loyal  to  the  Crown  and  the  lack 
of  governing  ability  among  most  of  the  native  races. 
Natives  are  found,  however,  in  the  highest  courts 
and  Executive  and  Legislative  Councils.  Most  of 
the  lower  and  all  of  the  lowest  positions  are  filled  by 
Indians,  so  that  the  government  of  this  vast  empire 
is  in  the  hands  of  about  twelve  hundred  higher  and 
six  or  eight  thousand  lower  English  officials  and  a 
million  and  a  half  natives.2 


1  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915,  123. 

2  Lowell,  ii.,  422.     Lord  Curzon  says  that  he  has  seen  the  state- 
ment that  the  government  employees  of  all  grades  in  India  (not 
including  the  army)  include  1,500,000  natives  and  10,000  Europeans. 
(North  American  Review,   vol.  cxci.,   p.  156;  August,  1910.)     The 
Cyclopadia  Britannica,   xiv.,   386,   and  other  authorities,  indicate 


India — Protectorates  323 

Law  and  Judiciary.  The  teeming  millions  of 
India  have  received  the  inestimable  blessing  of 
England's  just,  humane,  and  uniform  system  of  crimi- 
nal law.  By  some  of  the  ablest  judicial  minds 
the  criminal  law  has  been  systematized  into  a  code, 
which  is  made  the  clearer  by  illustrations  of  actual 
cases  briefly  stated  under  each  section.  The  code 
is  drawn  in  part  from  Indian  and  Roman  law,  but 
is  fundamentally  English  law  simplified  and  adapted 
to  Indian  conditions.1 

In  civil  law  the  situation  is  somewhat  different. 
It  is  necessary  to  regard  in  the  relationships  of  life, 
business  transactions,  etc.,  the  habits  to  which  a 
people  have  long  been  accustomed.  Hence,  "for 
many  civil  purposes  the  law  of  race,  religion,  and 
caste  governs."2 

The  English  jury  system  has  been  introduced  in 
a  modified  form  in  criminal  trials.  There  is  no 
grand  jury,  and  the  trial  jury  consists  of  three,  five, 
seven,  or  nine  members  according  to  the  gravity  of 
the  case  and  the  grade  of  the  court.  A  verdict  is 
rendered  by  a  majority.  The  right  of  appeal  is 
much  more  extensive  than  in  England  itself,3  due 
doubtless  to  the  lack  of  confidence  in  the  lower  native 
courts.  The  higher  courts  even  review  the  decisions 

that  6,500  would  be  nearer  the  total  number  of  Europeans.      Cf. 
N.  A.  R.,  cxcii.,  p.  374. 

1  Cyclopedia  Britannica,  vii.,  463. 

a  Ib.  3  /&.t  viiM  464. 


324  Empire  and  Colonies 

of  the  lower  courts  without  appeal  being  made,  in 
order  to  correct  injustice.  The  government  retains 
extensive  power  of  banishment  or  imprisonment 
without  trial  in  emergencies. 

The  jury  is  never  employed  in  civil  cases  in 
India.1 

India  has  a  body  of  well-educated  and  well-paid 
judges.  Indians  hold  the  great  majority  of  the  lower 
and  many  of  the  higher  judgeships,  and  some  are 
found  even  in  the  highest  courts.  In  the  great  pro- 
vinces having  the  more  liberal  forms  of  government, 
final  appeal  lies  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the 
Privy  Council  in  London. 

The  Army.  The  government  of  India  keeps  a 
standing  army  of  about  230,000  men,  two  thirds 
being  natives  and  one  third  British,  with  the  pur- 
pose of  preventing  insurrections,  wars  between  native 
princes,  and  conquest  by  foreign  powers.  They  are 
all  supported  out  of  the  Indian  taxes,  as  are  all  civil 
officials  of  the  Indian  government.  When  on  service 
outside  India,  they  are  paid  by  the  British  treasury. 

The  government  maintains  about  100,000  troops 
besides  these  for  police  purposes,  etc.  The  princes 
of  the  native  states  keep  armies  aggregating  about 
100,000  men,  organized  and  officered  as  they  see 
fit.  The  British  Government  has  nothing  to  do 

1  Ilbert's  Government  of  India,  and  Imperial  Gazetteer  of  India,  iv. 
on  juries. 


India — Protectorates  325 

with  these  troops  further  than  to  limit  their  number, 
etc.,  as  they  think  proper. 

Native  States.  What  has  been  said  so  far  de- 
scribes the  government  of  that  portion  of  India 
which  is  under  the  direct  control  of  the  English. 
Almost  a  fourth  of  the  population1  is  still  under  the 
government  of  native  princes.  The  agencies  for 
the  improvement  of  the  condition  of  the  people  and 
the  rudiments  of  self-government  which  have  been 
introduced  by  the  British  in  their  territories  have 
been  set  up  by  some  of  the  more  progressive  native 
rulers  in  their  states,  while  in  others  the  ancient 
personal  authority  of  the  sovereign  remains  unmodi- 
fied by  popular  elements.  The  Gaekwar  of  Baroda, 
e.  g.,  a  state  of  almost  two  and  a  half  million  inhabi- 
tants, has  adopted  progressive  western  methods  with 
such  success  as  to  be  regarded  with  the  greatest 
pride  by  the  party  of  Indian  self-government,  who 
proclaim  Baroda  as  "regarded  all  over  India  as  a 
model  state."2 

Such  serious  discontent  was  caused  by  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  native  dynasties  that  their  dethronement 
by  conquest  and  the  annexation  of  their  possessions 
directly  to  the  British  Crown  has  long  ago  been 


1  Thirty-nine  per  cent,  of  the  territory  and  twenty-two  per  cent, 
of  the  population. 

3  See  account  by  Saint  Nihal  Singh  in  the  North  American  Review 
for  September,  1911;  cxcii.,  376. 


326  Empire  and  Colonies 

abandoned.  There  are  almost  seven  hundred  of 
these  native  states,  varying  in  size  from  eighty-two 
thousand  square  miles  with  thirteen  and  a  third 
million  people  down  to  little  areas  hardly  bigger 
than  a  large  plantation.1 

The  British  Resident.  The  native  prince  is  by 
no  means  free  to  govern  as  he  pleases;  for  at  his  court 
there  is  a  British  Resident,  whose  advice  he  is 
virtually  obliged  to  follow.  The  English  King  as 
Emperor  of  India  is  the  prince's  immediate  overlord, 
something  as  the  King  of  mediaeval  France,  e.  g., 
was  the  overlord  of  the  Duke  of  Burgundy,  and  may 
interfere  in  any  way  that  he  sees  fit  to  protect  either 
his  own  interests  or  those  of  the  prince's  subjects. 
The  British  did  not  create  this  feudal  relation,  but 
found  it  in  a  state  of  decay  and  restored  it  in  its 
full  vigour  when  the  King  as  Emperor  of  India 
assumed  the  duties  of  the  deposed  Grand  Mogul. 

Bad  government  brings  a  warning;  and  if  the 
prince  proves  permanently  stubborn  or  incapable,  he 
is  deposed  and  his  place  filled  by  some  proper  relative.  * 
British  control  over  such  public  works  as  railways 
and  telegraphs  extends  throughout  the  native  states 
the  same  as  through  other  parts  of  India,  and 
Europeans  can  be  tried  only  before  an  English  court. 

The  native  states  thus  cannot  be  called  colonies 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  425;  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915 ',  125. 

2  Ib.t  ii.,  425-6. 


India — Protectorates  327 

so  much  as  protectorates,  or  dependencies.  They 
are  protected  both  against  invasion  by  enemies  and 
rebellion  by  their  subjects,  but  are  dependent  upon 
the  British  Government. 

Egypt.  After  exercising  an  authority  amounting 
to  sovereignty  for  over  thirty  years,  England,  in 
1914,  in  consequence  of  the  Khedive's  joining  his 
nominal  overlord,  Turkey,  in  declaring  war  against 
England,  deposed  the  Khedive,  put  his  uncle  on  the 
throne  with  the  more  exalted  title  of  Sultan,  and 
declared  the  country  annexed  to  the  British  Empire 
as  a  protectorate.  England  had  fortunately  the 
very  year  previous  set  up  a  very  liberal  degree  of 
self-government  for  an  oriental  country,  and  hence 
the  dangers  to  British  rule  were  there,  as  in  India 
and  South  Africa,  forestalled  by  the  just  and  reason- 
able recognition  which  had  been  given  to  national 
aspirations. 

The  Sultan  and  the  Lord  High  Commissioner. 
The  Sultan  has  as  chief  adviser  an  Englishman 
known  as  the  Lord  High  Commissioner.  Though 
the  Sultan  is  treated  with  great  respect,  and  though 
his  consent  is  necessary  to  acts  of  government,  he 
has  slight  freedom  in  resisting  the  determination  of 
his  British  adviser. 

The  Ministry.  The  executive  departments  are 
in  charge  of  seven  native  Ministers;  but  each  has 
an  English  adviser  whose  opinion  carries  great  weight, 


328  Empire  and  Colonies 

and  over  them  all  is  the  British  Lord  High  Commis- 
sioner. Englishmen  fill  so  many  of  the  higher  ad- 
ministrative positions  as  to  cause  serious  discontent 
among  ambitious  educated  Egyptians. 

The  Legislative  Assembly.  This  body,  dating  in 
its  present  enlarged  form  from  1913,  affords  the 
natives  an  ample  opportunity  to  express  their  desires, 
and  a  strong  means  of  inducing  the  government  to 
enact  them  into  law.  The  Assembly  consists  of 
ninety  members.  Of  these  the  ministers  and  cer- 
tain members  appointed  to  represent  different 
classes  constitute  twenty-four.  The  other  sixty-six 
are  chosen  by  the  people  through  electoral  colleges. 

No  new  tax  can  be  imposed  without  the  consent 
of  the  Assembly.  If  the  executive  cannot  convince 
the  Assembly  of  the  need  of  a  law  which  it  desires, 
it  can,  after  full  discussion,  enact  it  without  their 
consent.  The  executive  also  has  the  power  of  abso- 
lute veto  upon  any  bill  passed  by  the  Assembly. 
The  latter,  however,  possesses  the  right  of  compel- 
ling the  government  to  veto  any  proposal  three 
times  before  it  is  considered  disposed  of  for  that 
occasion.  It  is  thus  made  unpleasant  and  even 
unsafe  persistently  to  disregard  the  desires  of  the 
inhabitants. 

A  Local  Legislature  is  elected  by  the  people  in 
each  province.  It  has  authority  to  pass  ordinances 
on  certain  local  affairs,  particularly  markets,  vil- 


India — Protectorates  329 

lages,  elementary  education,  and  the  pay  of  local 
police.1 

Effects  of  English  Rule.  England  feels  that  she 
must  remain  in  Egypt  to  insure  her  route  to  India; 
but,  in  accord  with  the  enlightened  policy  on  which 
she  has  learned  to  rule  her  Empire,  she  has  made 
good  her  position  by  a  series  of  economic,  engineer- 
ing, sanitary,  and  political  improvements  and  safe- 
guards for  the  small  farmer  which  have  given  Egypt 
a  prosperity  beyond  anything  which  the  people 
have  ever  known. 

The  Future  of  the  Empire.  What  will  be  the 
fate  of  England's -far-spreading  and  heterogeneous 
Empire  as  its  various  constituent  nations  of  non- 
English  blood  come  to  national  consciousness,  intel- 
ligence, and  wealth,  only  the  future  can  tell.  If  all 
the  colonies  were  of  English  stock  and  traditions, 
the  problem  would  still  be  one  demanding  the  high- 
est talent  for  government;  but  to  devise  a  plan  of 
holding  together  permanently  vast  nations  scat- 
tered over  the  whole  face  of  the  globe,  differing 
in  race,  religion,  traditions,  ideals,  and  degree  of 
civilization  as  widely  as  they  do  in  geographical 
position,  would  constitute  a  triumph  of  constructive 
statesmanship  beyond  anything  history  has  yet  wit- 
nessed. 

While  giving  these  peoples  the  benefit  of  those 

1  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1913,  1325. 


33°  Empire  and  Colonies 

elements  in  English  civilization  that  appear  suitable 
to  their  needs  and  temperaments,  England  studi- 
ously refrains  from  the  policy  which  has  made 
foreign  domination  so  hateful  to  several  subject 
peoples  on  the  continent  of  Europe — the  policy  of 
seeking  to  force  upon  them  a  civilization  not  their 
own. 

The  bond  of  union  must  be  the  realization  of  a 
common  interest,  ennobled  with  a  sense  of  a  common 
patriotism.  That  the  non-English  races  are  coming 
to  share  this  spirit  is  testified  by  many  such  expres- 
sions as  that  of  a  noted  Indian  in  picturing  the 
effects  of  British  rule  upon  his  country: 

Unmindful  of  their  ancient  name 

And  lost  to  Honour,  Glory,  Fame, 

And  sunk  in  strife 

Thou  found'st  them,  whom  thy  touch  has  made 
Men,  to  whom  thy  breath  conveyed 

A  nobler  life.1 

Except  by  giving  life  itself,  as  many  Indians  have 
done,  no  more  eloquent  or  significant  expression  of 
this  same  sentiment  could  be  given  than  the  follow- 
ing cry  of  devotion  to  "the  mother-country "  by  a 
native  Indian  newspaper  on  the  outbreak  of  the 
Great  War,  in  1914: 

Behind  the  serried  ranks  of  one  of  the  finest  armies 
in  the  world,  there  stand  the  multitudinous  peoples  of 

1  Nawab  Nizamut  Jung,  High  Court  Judge  of  Hyderabad. 


India — Protectorates  331 

India,  ready  to  co-operate  with  the  Government  in  the 
defence  of  the  Empire,  which,  for  them,  means,  in  its 
ultimate  evolution,  the  complete  recognition  of  their 
rights  as  citizens  of  the  freest  State  in  the  world.  We 
may  have  our  differences  with  the  Government — and 
what  people  have  not? — but  in  the  presence  of  a  common 
enemy,  be  it  Germany  or  any  other  Power,  we  sink 
our  differences,  we  forget  our  little  quarrels,  and  close 
our  ranks,  and  offer  all  that  we  possess  in  defence  of  the 
great  Empire,  to  which  we  are  all  so  proud  to  belong 
and  with  which  the  future  prosperity  and  advancement 
of  our  people  are  bound  up.1 

Not  only  an  affection  that  instinctively  speaks  of 
England  as  "the  motherland,"  but  a  clear  under- 
standing of  what  the  British  connection  means  for 
India,  appears  in  the  following  extract  from  another 
native  newspaper: 

India's  fortunes  are  indissolubly  linked  up  with  those 
of  England.  As  Lord  Curzon  rightly  said,  India  cannot 
do  without  England,  and  England  would  be  impotent 
without  India.  It  is  not  implied  that  the  mother- 
country  has  not  enough  men  to  fight  the  battles,  or  that 
it  cannot  unaided  crush  Germany!  But  the  Indians 
and  the  Europeans  in  this  country  owe  it  to  themselves 
to  don  the  armour  in  defence  of  the  Empire,  to  defend 
India,  and,  if  need  be,  to  go  to  any  other  part  of  the 
world  at  the  call  of  the  motherland.2 

With  due  moderation,  strength,  and  wisdom,  the 

1  The  Bengalee,  Calcutta.  a  The  Beharee,  of  Bankipore. 


332  Empire  and  Colonies 

Empire  may  go  far  to  teach  the  world  a  peaceful 
federation  of  mankind ;  for  if  such  a  vast  proportion 
of  the  race  can  live  at  harmony  with  itself,  why 
cannot  a  still  larger  portion? 

Imperial  Conferences.  The  staggering  weight  of 
the  imperial  problem,  together  with  ideas  of  an  indi- 
vidualistic philosophy,  led  a  large  part  of  the  English 
people  a  few  decades  ago  to  anticipate  with  com- 
posure the  ultimate  dissolution  of  the  Empire  into 
independent  nations.  Such  views  are  now  held  by 
practically  nobody,  and  the  leaders  of  politics  took 
up  some  years  ago  with  the  enthusiasm  of  a  great 
ideal  the  task  of  binding  the  Empire  into  closer 
material  and  spiritual  union.  In  pursuance  of  this 
there  have  been  several  conferences  in  London 
between  representatives  of  the  mother-country  and 
the  self-governing  colonies,  and  it  is  now  arranged 
that  these  shall  occur  every  four  years.  The  mother- 
country  will  be  represented  by  the  Premier  and  the 
Colonial  Secretary,  and  the  colonies  by  their  Pre- 
miers and  other  delegates.  Steps  have  been  taken 
for  the  representation  of  India  at  future  conferences, 
in  recognition  of  her  splendid  loyalty  and  service 
in  the  Great  War.  These  imperial  conferences 
have  no  law-making  authority.  They  indicate  a 
spirit  of  closer  union,  however,  as  does  the  fact  that 
several  of  the  self-governing  colonies,  even  before 
the  Great  War,  began  granting  slightly  lower  tariff 


India — Protectorates  333 

rates  to  products  from  the  British  Isles  than  to  those 
from  other  countries.1 

Imperial  Federation.  Any  form  of  world-wide 
federal  government  for  the  Empire  including  pos- 
sessions inhabited  by  non-European  stocks  seems 
far  beyond  the  possibilities  of  the  present.  Even  a 
federation  of  the  mother-country  and  the  great 
white  man  colonies  in  an  imperial  legislature  to 
make  laws  on  matters  of  common  interest,  such  as 
war,  navy,  foreign  affairs,  and  commercial  relations 
between  parts  of  the  Empire  and  with  the  outside 
world,  presents  difficulties  greater  than  have  ever 
confronted  the  framers  of  a  successful  confederacy. 
But  in  the  crucible  of  a  common  agony  and  peril 
things  have  come  to  light  that  could  not  be  discovered 
by  the  cold  speculations  of  current  politics.  The 
Great  War  revealed  to  an  astonished  world  how 
powerful  and  how  nearly  universal  is  the  love  of  the 
Empire,  its  ideals  and  blessings,  when  at  the  cry  of 
the  mother  the  men  of  the  lion  line  from  over  land 
and  sea  came  and  kept  coming  to  seal  their  devotion 
with  their  lives.  Since  history  has  been  written  the 
world  had  never  witnessed  such  a  sublime  expres- 
sion of  uncompelled  devotion  among  so  many 
different  kinds  of  men  and  countries  to  a  motherland 
whom  they  loved  for  what  she  was  and  what  she 
had  done  for  them  and  for  all  mankind. 

1  Lowell,  ii.f  435-8. 


334  Empire  and  Colonies 

The  meaning  of  this  is  too  plain  to  be  overlooked ; 
but  what  changes  it  will  produce  in  the  organic 
structure  of  the  Empire  can  only  be  conjectured. 
Some  expect  early  a  common  council  of  mother- 
country  and  colonies  with  authority  over  such  mat- 
ters as  army,  navy,  peace,  war,  international  and 
intra-imperial  relations,  tariffs,  etc.  But  some  of 
the  wisest  and  most  experienced  empire  builders 
perceive  so  many  difficulties  in  the  way  of  any  formal 
imperial  constitution  that  they  expect  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  past,  to  any  considerable  extent,  for  a 
long  time  yet  to  be  modified  in  spirit  rather  than 
mechanism. 


BOOK  IV 
Social  and  Political  Characteristics 


335 


BOOK  IV.     SOCIAL  AND  POLITICAL 
CHARACTERISTICS 

CHAPTER  XXX 

THE  ESTABLISHED  CHURCH 

Origin  of  Union  of  Church  and  State.  Like  many 
other  European  countries,  England  has  an  "estab- 
lished church,"  i.  e.  one  particular  denomination 
which  enjoys  a  peculiar  and  privileged  position. 
This  system  originated  in  the  Middle  Ages  when 
practically  all  the  inhabitants  of  one  country  were 
of  the  same  religion,  and  it  was  considered  that  a 
person  must  belong  to  the  church  as  it  is  now  that 
he  must  be  a  citizen  of  the  state,  whether  he  cares 
to  or  not.  A  natural  conclusion  was  that  the  ex- 
penses of  religion  should  be  supported  by  taxation, 
either  by  the  state  itself  or  by  church  officials  backed 
by  the  power  of  the  state.  With  the  division  of 
people  among  different  creeds  in  the  modern  world, 
this  system  has  become  impossible;  although  it  took 
centuries  of  bloody  warfare  and  fruitless  persecution 
32  337 


338  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

to  convince  mankind  that  the  only  way  to  secure 
peace  is  to  allow  every  person  to  belong  to  any 
church  he  pleases  or  to  none  at  all.  Although  they 
realize  this  in  England  as  fully  as  in  this  country, 
still  some  remnants  of  the  old  system  remain  and 
are  among  the  most  productive  causes  of  strife  and 
ill-feeling. 

The  established  church,  called  the  Church  of 
England,  bears  the  name  of  Protestant  Episcopal 
and  corresponds  to  the  denomination  known  in  the 
United  States  by  the  same  title;  and  though  it  enjoys 
many  special  advantages,  its  privileges  are  by  no 
means  what  they  once  were. 

Support  of  the  Church.  In  the  Middle  Ages  vast 
tracts  of  land  were  donated  to  the  church.  Many 
of  these  it  still  holds  and  of  course  draws  their  in- 
come. Also  in  those  distant  times  it  was  the  law 
that  a  tenth  of  the  products  from  the  land  should 
be  paid  to  the  church.  Though  the  right  to  collect 
these  tithes  was  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation  in 
many  cases  taken  by  the  government  from  the 
church  and  sold  or  given  as  a  favour  to  laymen, 
mere  private  persons,  the  church  still  retains  from 
this  source  an  annual  income  equal  to  perhaps  fifteen 
or  twenty  million  dollars.1  The  voluntary  contribu- 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  375.  The  voluntary  contributions  to  the  Church  of 
England  amounted  for  the  year  1913-14  to  £8,207,000  or  #39,924,- 
262.— Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915,  26. 


The  Established  Church  339 

tions  of  its  members,  though  more  than  twice  that 
amount,  are  nevertheless  made  much  less  burdensome 
than  must  be  the  case  in  other  churches. 

The  Tithes.  The  tithes  are  not  strictly  a  tax 
today  upon  the  landowners,  though  they  are,  of 
course,  a  portion  of  the  national  income  appropri- 
ated to  the  benefit  of  one  particular  part  of  the 
community.  When  the  tithes  were  first  imposed 
they  were  in  full  effect  a  tax  on  the  landlords  at  that 
time.  They  do  not  now  constitute  a  burden  on  the 
landowners;  for  when  they  or  their  ancestors  bought 
their  lands,  they  got  them  at  a  price  less  in  amount 
in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  the  tithes,  and  hence 
received  as  good  a  return  on  their  investment  as  they 
would  have  received  on  a  larger  sum  if  they  had  had 
to  pay  a  higher  price  on  account  of  the  land's  being 
free  from  tithes.  To  abolish  tithes  today  would 
amount  to  a  stupendous  gift  to  the  landholders. 
Therefore,  even  though  the  Church  of  England 
should  be  disestablished,  i.  e.  deprived  of  its  special 
privileges  and  required  to  live,  like  other  churches, 
by  the  voluntary  contributions  of  its  members,  the 
tithes  would  not  be  abolished;  but,  being  in  the 
nature  of  a  charge  for  public  purposes,  they  would 
be  appropriated  by  the  government  for  the  support 
of  education,  charity,  or  other  general  benefits  for 
the  nation  at  large. 

Thus,  though  in  a  sense  the  established  church 


34°  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

lays  no  burden  of  tax  on  the  people,  it  does  enjoy  a 
vast  income  contributed  by  the  nation  at  large,  and 
hence  possesses  a  special  privilege  out  of  harmony 
with  the  principles  of  justice  and  modern  democratic 
equality  before  the  law.  This  unfairness  is  dimin- 
ished, but  not  entirely  relieved,  by  the  fact  that 
the  larger  part  of  the  lands  from  which  the  tithes 
are  derived  are  owned  by  members  of  the  established 
church. * 

The  last  privilege  of  the  church  to  lay  a  special 
tax  on  the  people  in  addition  to  the  tithe  was  abol- 
ished in  1868,  and  it  has  been  almost  a  hundred 
years  since  Parliament  appropriated  money  for  its 
assistance. 

The  King  the  Head  of  the  Church.  One  result  of 
the  Reformation  in  England  was  to  make  the  King 
by  act  of  Parliament  Supreme  Head  on  Earth  of  the 
established  church.  Until  modern  times  this  con- 
ferred upon  the  sovereign  some  of  his  most  im- 
portant powers  and  lodged  in  his  hands  momentous 
opportunities  for  good  or  evil.  Though  the  personal 
authority  of  the  King  in  this  as  in  other  matters  is 
gone,  and  the  modern  principle  of  keeping  religion 
and  politics  apart  has  deprived  the  legal  union  of 

1  Though  the  tithes  are  sometimes  collected  from  the  landlord 
and  sometimes  from  the  tenant,  they  are  theoretically  deducted 
from  the  income  of  the  landlord,  as  otherwise  his  rents  would  be 
higher.  We  cannot  enter  upon  the  complicated  subject  of  the 
shifting  of  the  burden  between  the  landlord  and  the  tenant. 


The  Established  Church  341 

church  and  state  of  much  of  its  former  significance, 
we  shall  perceive  in  the  following  paragraphs  that 
there  still  remain  certain  important  effects. 

Government  Control.  As  strange  and  unper- 
missible  as  such  a  thing  may  seem  to  an  American, 
the  organization  of  the  established  church,  and  even 
its  creed  and  religious  ceremonies,  are  prescribed 
by  act  of  Parliament.  Though  these  are  not  now 
subjects  of  political  controversy,  a  Parliament 
composed  of  a  majority  of  men  of  a  hostile  religion 
could  legally  force  upon  it  a  creed  denying  every 
article  of  Christian  belief.  Any  serious  interfer- 
ence with  religion  would,  however,  put  an  end  to 
the  union  of  church  and  state ;  for  a  powerful  faction 
within  "the  establishment"  itself  jealously  resents 
any  control  by  the  state;  and  though  the  people  of 
modern  England  tolerate  the  remnants  of  the  an- 
cient system,  they  would  not  endure  any  attempt  to 
revive  its  activity. 

Bishops  and  Dioceses.  For  purposes  of  church 
government,  England  is  divided  into  two  provinces, 
Canterbury  in  the  south  and  York  in  the  north,  the 
former  being  much  the  larger.  Each  province  is 
divided  into  a  number  of  dioceses,  there  being  thirty- 
six.1  Over  each  diocese  there  is  a  bishop,  and 


1  The  Welsh  Disestablishment  Act  of  1914,  by  putting  the  Episcopal 
Church  in  Wales  on  the  same  basis  as  other  churches  reduced  the 
number  of  bishoprics  in  the  "established  church"  from  40  to  36. 


342  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

over  each  of  the  two  provinces  there  is  an  arch- 
bishop. There  are  also  suffragan  (i.  e.  assistant) 
bishops,  about  equal  in  number  to  the  bishops, 
each  having  charge  of  a  particular  part  of  the  diocese 
of  the  bishop  whom  he  assists. 

The  authority  of  the  bishop  is  confined  to  his 
own  diocese.  The  archbishop  has  a  diocese  of  his 
own,  in  which  he  performs  all  the  ordinary  duties 
of  a  bishop;  but  he  also  possesses  in  addition  cer- 
tain rights  of  leadership  and  supervision  over  all 
the  dioceses  of  his  province.  Neither  archbishop 
can  interfere  in  the  province  of  the  other;  though  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  as  "Primate  of  all  Eng- 
land," is  considered  the  head  of  the  church  under 
the  King  and  enjoys  the  distinction  of  crowning  the 
sovereign  and  taking  precedence  on  all  official  occa- 
sions of  every  person  in  the  realm  after  princes  of 
the  royal  blood. 

Convocation.  Every  year  the  King  as  legal  head 
of  the  church  orders  the  archbishops  respectively 
to  summon  the  ancient  representative  legislative 
body  of  each  of  the  two  provinces,  called  Convoca- 
tion. One  of  the  most  important  consequences  of 
the  union  of  church  and  state  is  that  Convocation 
can  neither  meet  nor  deliberate  without  the  express 
permission  of  the  King,  and  that  its  resolutions 

The  four  Episcopal  dioceses  and  bishops  in  Wales  continue  their 
religious  duties  as  before. 


The  Established  Church  343 

have  no  binding  force  without  the  royal  sanction. 
Their  meetings  are  ordinarily  simply  for  consulta- 
tion, and  only  on  rare  occasions  are  they  allowed  to 
discuss  church  legislation. 

Convocation  consists  of  two  houses.  The  upper 
is  made  up  of  the  bishops,  presided  over  by  the  arch- 
bishop. The  lower  consists  of  the  suffragan  bishops, 
certain  higher  clergy  called  archdeacons  and  deans, 
and  of  representatives  of  the  parish  pastors  and 
cathedral  chapters  elected  at  the  same  time  that 
parliamentary  elections  occur.1  In  the  province 
of  Canterbury  the  parish  pastors  in  each  diocese 
elect  two  representatives  called  proctors,  and 
each  cathedral  chapter  elects  one  proctor.  A 
cathedral  chapter  consists  of  four  (in  a  few  in- 
stances five  or  six)  eminent  clergymen  who  form  a 
sort  of  council  to  the  bishop  and  have  duties  con- 
nected with  the  cathedral,  i.  e.  the  bishop's 
church,  of  the  diocese.  The  rule  in  the  province 
of  York  is  the  same,  except  that  the  parish  clergy 
there  elect  two  proctors  for  each  archdeaconry. 
The  lower  house  consists  of  about  160  members  in 
Canterbury  and  about  80  in  York.  It  is  evident 

1  For  suffragan  bishops,  see  page  342. 

The  bishop's  assistant,  known  as  the  dean,  is  next  in  rank  below 
the  bishop.  There  is  ordinarily  one  for  each  diocese.  Some  dio- 
ceses are  divided  into  two  and  some  into  four  archdeaconries,  and 
over  each  is  an  archdeacon  with  extensive  powers  in  carrying  out 
the  authority  of  the  bishop.  In  1913  there  were  about  thirty- two 
deans  and  one  hundred  archdeacons  in  England. 


344  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

that  the  system  is  very  undemocratic,  as  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  thousands  of  parish  pastors  are 
outnumbered  by  the  upper  ranks  of  the  clergy  who 
are  members  of  the  lower  house. 

The  House  of  Laymen.  Of  late  years  there  has 
been  created  in  both  the  provinces  of  Canterbury 
and  York  an  extra-legal  body  called  the  House  of 
Laymen,  with  the  object  of  obtaining  their  view- 
point and  co-operation  in  the  work  of  the  church. 
It  consists  of  delegates  chosen  by  elected  representa- 
tives of  the  laymen  of  the  church.  They  have, 
of  course,  no  authority  in  church  government. 

The  Representative  Church  Assembly.  The  con- 
vocations of  Canterbury  and  York  are  entirely  inde- 
pendent of  each  other;  but  a  means  has  been  devised 
for  bringing  together  a  body  which  may  express 
the  aspirations  and  counsels  of  the  entire  body  of 
the  established  church.  This  is  the  Representative 
Church  Assembly.  It  consists  of  the  Convocations 
and  the  Houses  of  Laymen  of  both  provinces  all 
meeting  as  one  body.  Though  entirely  outside  the 
legal  constitution  of  the  church,  and  enjoying  no 
function  except  consultation,  the  Assembly  has 
proved  of  great  value  in  stimulating  religion  and 
unifying  the  church. 

Appointment  of  Bishops.  The  archbishops, 
bishops,  and  suffragan  bishops  of  the  established 
church  are  appointed  by  the  Prime  Minister  acting 


The  Established  Church  345 

in  the  name  of  the  King.  It  is  not  surprising  that 
the  bishops,  though  always  men  of  upright  character, 
are  sometimes  of  a  religious  tendency  quite  different 
from  what  the  church  itself  would  have  endorsed. 
No  sovereign  or  Minister  would  now  tyrannically 
threaten  one  of  these  "  chief  pastors/'  as  Queen 
Elizabeth  is  said  to  have  done  by  saying:  "Proud 
prelate,  remember  what  you  were  before  I  made  you 
what  you  are.  Unless  you  comply  with  my  demand, 
by  God,  I  will  unfrock  you."  None  the  less,  the 
bishops  and  archbishops  of  this  great  spiritual 
body  still  stand  in  the  same  legal  subjection  to  the 
political  head  of  the  country. 

Bishops  in  Parliament.  The  membership  of 
twenty-six  bishops1  in  Parliament  has  already  been 
described.  This  virtually  gives  double  representa- 
tion to  the  Episcopal  interest  and  the  Conservative 
party,  and  hence  has  been  strongly  opposed  by  other 
bodies,  but  it  has  lost  much  of  its  importance  with 
the  abolition  of  the  veto  power  in  the  House  of  Lords. 

Powers  of  the  Bishops.  Only  a  bishop  can  or- 
dain a  clergyman  of  the  established  church.  The 
bishops  appoint  many  of  the  pastors  of  churches; 
but  a  majority  of  these  are  appointed  by  laymen 
whose  predecessors  in  ownership  of  certain  lands  or 
endowments  hundreds  of  years  ago  obtained  this 
right  by  founding  the  church,  or  in  some  other  way ; 

1  See  pages  82-3,  and  83,  n. 


346  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

and  many  more  are  named  by  the  Lord  Chancellor 
as  the  representative  of  the  King.1  The  congrega- 
tion itself  never  has  the  right  to  choose  its  own 
pastor.  The  bishop  of  the  diocese,  however,  has 
the  right  to  reject  any  appointee  (or  more  correctly 
nominee)  on  the  ground  of  bad  character,  but  not 
because  of  unfitness  for  the  particular  position. 

Irregularity  of  life  or  teaching  in  a  clergyman  of 
the  established  church  will  incur  an  investigation 
by  his  bishop  and  trial  either  by  him  or  a  govern- 
ment court  of  laymen.  The  final  appeal  in  all  cases, 
either  of  morals  or  doctrine,  lies  to  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  the  Privy  Council — a  body  composed 
of  laymen  forming,  we  will  recall,2  a  part  of  the 
appellate  court  system  of  the  kingdom  and  Empire. 
Nominally,  of  course,  the  final  authority  rests  with 
the  King  as  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church.  The 
Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council  are  simply 
the  men  to  whom,  in  the  process  of  depriving  the 
sovereign  of  authority,  this  particular  power  has 
fallen. 

Theoretical  Difficulties  versus  Practical  Success. 
The  system  would  break  down  entirely  if  the  govern- 
ment should  fall  into  the  hands  of  a  hostile  denomina- 
tion or  of  a  party  opposed  to  the  Christian  religion; 

1  The  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915,  page  26,  states  that  private 
persons  appoint  the  pastors  of  about  8500  of  the  14,387  parishes 
in  England  and  Wales. 

a  See  above,  page  202. 


The  Established  Church  347 

but  as  it  is,  like  many  other  English  customs  that 
appear  absurd  to  an  outsider,  it  works  better  than 
might  be  expected.  If  we  point  out  all  the  terrible 
things  that  a  mere  majority  in  Parliament  might 
do  either  in  religion  or  politics,  the  Englishman  may 
reply  that,  despite  the  guarantees  with  which  we 
surround  our  property  and  liberties  in  our  written 
constitutions,  the  majority  of  the  people,  or  at  most 
a  two-thirds  majority — and  in  times  of  revolution 
fractions  are  not  carefully  considered — can  at  any 
time  destroy  both  the  constitution  and  what  it  is 
supposed  to  protect.  The  truth  is  that  in  both 
cases  private  rights  and  public  welfare  depend  upon 
the  virtue  and  intelligence  of  the  people;  and  when 
these  are  present,  the  particular  form  of  government 
is  of  secondary  importance,  though  doubtless  differ- 
ent forms  serve  best  in  different  circumstances.  If 
virtue  and  intelligence  disappear,  constitutions  both 
written  and  unwritten  will  soon  follow. 

The  Future  of  the .  Establishment.  Probably  a 
majority  of  Englishmen,  like  practically  all  Ameri- 
cans, think  that  the  cause  of  true  religion  and  moral- 
ity would  be  benefited  by  the  complete  separation 
of  the  church  from  the  government.  Disestablish- 
ment is  strongly  urged  by  a  growing  body  of  people, 
and  as  the  Episcopalians  now  only  slightly  outnum- 
ber the  Dissenters,  though  still  considerably  more 
numerous  than  the  Roman  Catholics,  probably  not 


Social  and  Political  Characteristics 


many  decades  will  pass  before  at  least  a  partial 
abolition  of  the  special  privileges  of  this  one 
denomination.1 

The  church  was  disestablished  in  Wales  in  1914. 

Scotland  and  Ireland.  In  Scotland  the  Presby- 
terian is  the  established  church;  but  there  is  no 
appointment  of  ministers  by  laymen  and  there  are 
of  course  no  bishops.  The  congregations  choose 
their  own  pastors.  Almost  a  hundred  years  ago 
the  Scotch  Church  split  because  many  of  the  mem- 
bers were  opposed  to  the  "lay  patronage,"  i.  e. 
the  appointment  of  the  minister  by  some  layman, 
as  described  above  on  page  345;  and  although  lay 
patronage  has  long  been  abolished  in  the  Scottish 
Church,  the  small  seceding  factions  have  never 
reunited  with  the  establishment. 

In  Ireland  there  is  now  no  established  church, 
though  the  Episcopal  Church  still  retains  much  of 
its  former  income-producing  property.2 

1  In  1914  the  Church  of  England  in  England  and  Wales  num- 
bered 2,445,114;  other  Protestant  bodies  ("Dissenters"),  2,134,655; 
the  Roman  Catholics  (estimated)  1,900,000,  including  unconfirmed 
children  presumably.  —  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1915,  27. 

3  About  three  fourths  of  the  inhabitants  of  Ireland  are  Roman 
Catholics;  13  per  cent,  are  Episcopalians  and  about  10  per  cent. 
are  Presbyterians.  Other  denominations  are  small.  The  Pro- 
testants are  mainly  in  the  north.  —  Statesman's  Year  Book  for 
28. 


CHAPTER  XXXI 

EDUCATION 

Education  and  the  Modern  State.  Every  pro- 
gressive government  recognizes  the  necessity  of  its 
citizens'  possessing  at  least  an  elementary  education, 
as  it  is  impossible  for  an  ignorant  people  either  to 
govern  itself  properly  or  to  succeed  in  industrial 
competition  with  the  educated  nations  of  the  world. 
England  has  not  gone  so  far  as  several  other  nations 
in  providing  adequate  education  for  all  her  people, 
and  yet  she  has  done  much. 

J'We  may  divide  English  schools  into  three  grades — 
elementary,  grammar  school,  and  higher  institu- 
tions. The  means  of  support  are  public  taxation, 
tuition  fees,  and  the  income  from  endowments. 

Elementary  Schools.  First,  there  are  the  elemen- 
tary schools.  Some  of  these  are  supported  entirely 
by  taxation  and  are  therefore  called  "provided 
schools/*  i.  e.  they  are  provided  by  the  government.1 

1  These  were  formerly  called  board  schools,  because  they  were 
under  the  control  of  boards  of  trustees  before  the  institution  of  the 
present  system  of  control  by  the  borough  and  county  councils. 

349 


35°  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

Other  elementary  schools  are  the  property  of  re- 
ligious denominations  and  are  called  unprovided,  or 
voluntary  schools.  They  are  supported  in  part  by 
the  contributions  of  their  friends  and  in  part  by 
funds  from  the  government.  Education  in  practi- 
cally airelementary  schools,  both  provided  and  vol- 
untary, is  free.  The  provided  schools  are  attended 
mainly  by  the  children  of  the  working  classes.  It 
is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  there  are  in  addition 
expensive  private  schools  for  the  class  of  the  popula- 
tion who  care  to  pay  for  such  instruction. 

Compulsory  Education.  Every  parent  is  required 
by  law  to  send  his  children  of  proper  age  to  some 
elementary  school.  Above  the  elementary  school, 
however,  education  is  neither  free  nor  compulsory; 
though  there  are  in  the  higher  schools  scholarships 
which  are  awarded  to  the  children  of  the  poorer 
classes  for  excellent  work  in  the  elementary  school. 

Public  Supervision.  Control  by  public  officials 
is  absolute  over  the  provided  schools  and  very  ex- 
tensive over  the  voluntary,  with  the  object  of  main- 
taining standards  throughout  the  country. 

Secondary  Schools.  Next  in  order  come  the 
grammar  schools  and  the  great  "public  schools," 
which  answer  respectively  to  the  American  "high 
school"  and  the  grades  just  below,  and  to  the  col- 
lege preparatory  schools.  Let  us  first  dispose  of  the 
latter.  The  term  "public  school"  has  for  genera- 


Education  351 

tions  been  used  in  England  to  describe  the  celebrated 
institutions  for  preparing  boys  for  the  universities, 
such  as  Eton,  Harrow,  etc.  They  are  supported 
by  large  endowments  and  the  fees  of  their  patrons, 
and  are  "public"  only  in  the  sense  that  anyone  who 
chooses  to  pay  the  fees  and  the  cost  of  the  rather 
expensive  social  life  may  enter.  They  are,  of  course, 
patronized  principally  by  the  well-to-do  and  aristo- 
cratic classes. 

The  grammar  schools  are  supported  in  part  by  en- 
dowments, in  part  by  tuition  fees,  and  in  part  by 
public  taxation.  They  are  attended  mainly  by  the 
children  of  the  middle  class,  as  the  children  of  the 
poor  rarely  go  beyond  the  elementary  schools. 

Universities.  The  ancient  universities  of  Oxford 
and  Cambridge,  supported  by  their  liberal  endow- 
ments and  fees,  are  still  patronized  mainly  by  the 
wealthy  and  aristocratic.  The  opportunities  of 
forming  influential  friendships  and  the  bearing  of  the 
popular  and  practiced  man  of  the  world  make  them 
the  favourite  resorts  for  young  men  contemplating 
a  public  career. 

A  number  of  the  great  cities  of  the  country  now 
maintain  large  universities  with  magnificent  build- 
ings and  equipment  where  the  middle  and  labouring 
classes  can  obtain  at  moderate  cost  thorough  general, 
technical,  or  professional  education. 

The  Religious  Question.    The  proper  correlation 


352  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

of  the  school  and  religion  has  always  been  a  vexed 
question  where  large  elements  of  the  population 
differ  in  religious  belief.  In  America  we  leave  reli- 
gious education  out  of  the  public  schools,  which, 
though  necessary,  is  recognized  as  no  solution  of  the 
essential  question  at  stake — the  religious  and  moral 
training  of  the  rising  generation. 

England  follows  the  opposite  plan,  of  supplying 
religious  instruction  in  the  schools,  but  experiences 
grave  difficulties  in  its  operation.  The  trouble 
arises  largely  from  the  fact  that  most  of  the  volun- 
tary schools  are  owned  by  the  established  church 
and  the  religious  instruction  therefore  is  by  Episco- 
palians and  is  in  accord  with  their  creed.  The  law 
attempts  to  meet  this  difficulty  by  requiring  that 
the  religious  exercises  may  take  place  only  at  the 
opening  or  closing  of  school,  and  that  no  child  may 
be  compelled  to  be  present  at  them.  Other  denomi- 
nations object  violently  to  paying  taxes  to  support 
religious  instruction  of  which  they  do  not  approve, 
even  though  their  children  are  not  compelled  to 
attend  during  those  exercises.  This  is  the  most 
serious  subject  of  controversy  in  England  on  the 
relation  of  church  and  state. 

In  the  provided  schools,  which  belong  entirely 
to  the  public,  the  law  states  that  any  denomination 
may  employ  a  religious  teacher  to  give  instruction 
in  the  school  building  to  the  children  of  their  faith 


Education  353 

after  school  exercises.  This  is  obviously  unsatis- 
factory. 

It  is  well-nigh  universally  recognized  that  religious 
and  moral  instruction  for  the  young  is  of  supreme 
importance,  and  also  that,  sad  to  say,  many  parents 
are  not  qualified  to  give  it  in  their  own  homes.  Sun- 
day-school meets  only  once  to  the  day  school's  five 
times,  and  niany  children  do  not  attend  the  Sunday- 
school  at  all.  What  satisfactory  solution  the  world 
will  ultimately  adopt  is  not  yet  apparent. 

Education  in  Scotland  and  Ireland.  Scotland  has 
had  general  elementary  education  for  a  much  longer 
period  than  England,  which  goes  far  to  account  for 
the  extraordinarily  large  proportion  of  her  small 
population  who  have  attained  high  success  in  all 
parts  of  the  world.  In  Ireland  the  poverty  of  the 
people  and  the  unfortunate  religious  controversies 
which  have  divided  them  and  the  government  have 
checked  popular  education;  but  progress  is  now 
being  made  along  lines  in  general  similar  to  those 
we  have  sketched  for  England. 

23 


CHAPTER  XXXII 

• 

ARISTOCRACY  AND  DEMOCRACY 

Complexity  of  English  Society.  Society  and  life 
are  much  more  formal  and  complex  in  England,  as 
in  all  old  countries,  than  in  the  United  States.  This 
is  partly  due  to 'the  fact  that  with  long  time  many 
of  their  ideas,  customs,  and  institutions  have 
become  solidified  into  a  firm  system,  influencing 
all  relations  and  impeding  the  free  manifestation 
of  individuality. 

Social  Classes.  The  most  characteristic  feature 
of  this  rigid  social  system  is  the  hereditary  nobility. 
This  is  simply  the  topmost  layer  of  an  intricate 
system  of  class  distinctions  extending  to  the  lowest 
stratum,  each  acknowledging  its  social  inferiority 
to  that  above  and  with  a  more  decided  arrogance 
than  is  observed  in  a  country  like  the  United 
States  maintaining  its  superiority  over  the  one  next 
below. 

Under  royalty  are  the  nobility,  numbers  of  them 
354 


Aristocracy  and  Democracy        355 

connected  with  the  royal  family.  The  younger 
members  and  relatives  of  these  noble  families  are 
also  of  the  aristocracy,  though  not  of  the  nobility. 
The  knighthood  are  above  the  ordinary  citizens  in 
social  standing,  but  not  so  exalted  as  the  untitled 
relations  of  the  great  noble  families.  Next  come 
the  upper  middle  class,  consisting  of  prominent 
lawyers,  large  financiers,  eminent  professional  men 
in  all  lines,  wealthy  merchants,  and  large  landowners. 
Of  course  members  of  the  nobility  and  aristocracy 
may  engage  in  any  business  or  profession.  Many 
of  them  are  found  in  the  higher  financial  and  profes- 
sional pursuits.  The  lower  middle  class  consists  of 
men  of  less  success  and  wealth  in  the  same  pursuits 
as  those  that  make  up  the  upper  middle  class,  to- 
gether with  such  men  as  clerks,  salesmen,  etc.,  of 
the  better  sort.  The  yeomanry  consists  of  the  sub- 
stantial farmers  below  the  large  landowners. 

The  rest  of  society  is  spoken  of  in  a  general  way 
as  the  lower  classes,  though  subdivided  into  a  number 
of  groups.  First  come  the  artisans,  or  skilled  me- 
chanics, of  all  sorts;  next  the  unskilled  common 
labourers,  and  below  them  the  unfortunate  shiftless 
mass  ending  in  the  criminals  and  paupers. 

It  is  of  course  understood  that  none  of  these 
classes  enjoys  any  legal  position  or  privilege,  except 
that  of  the  lords  and  their  wives  to  be  tried  for 
serious  crimes  by  their  peers;  but  even  then  the 


356  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

penalty  is  the  same  as  for  the  lowest  pauper.1  Even 
the  word  gentleman  has  no  definite  social,  to  say 
nothing  of  legal,  definition.2 

The  stiff  structure  of  these  social  classes  has  a 
strong  influence  in  determining  advancement  in 
business,  professions,  and  politics,  and  all  the  thou- 
sand phases  of  social  life.  But  marked  ability  will 
raise  a  man  from  the  lowest  to  the  highest  station. 
There  have  been  Cabinet  Ministers  who  began  life 
as  manual  toilers,  and  there  are  said  to  be  lords 
whose  grandfathers  were  labourers.  When  Lloyd- 
George  became  prominent  in  politics,  it  was  com- 
monly stated  that  his  father  was  a  poor  Welsh  miner; 
when  he  entered  the  Ministry,  it  was  discovered  that 
his  father  was  a  humble  school-teacher;  and  when 
he  rose  to  be  the  most  influential  man  in  England, 
the  genealogists  reported  that  his  paternal  prede- 
cessor was  ' '  a  poor  but  respectable  attorney. ' '  What 
sire  will  be  supplied  him  now  that  he  has  been  sum- 
moned to  the  premiership  to  save  his  country  from 
threatened  ruin,  imagination  awaits  with  interest. 
Perhaps  they  will  discover  that,  like  heroes  of  old, 
he  is  a  son  of  the  gods,  which  after  all  is  not  a  bad 
explanation. 

1  Peers  enjoy  a  certain  immunity  from  arrest  and  several  other 
distinctions  of  slight  moment,  which  may  be  looked  up  in  any 
modern  edition  of  Blackstone. 

a  The  idea  that  right  to  a  coat  of  arms  is  necessary  in  England  to 
constitute  a  man  technically  a  gentleman  is  entirely  groundless. 


Aristocracy  and  Democracy        357 

Nevertheless,  the  presumption  is  felt  to  be  much 
in  favour  of  the  man  of  the  upper  class,  and  a  man 
of  ambition  seeking  to  rise  is  not  so  freely  encouraged 
as  in  the  United  States.  This  spirit  causes  many 
men  of  moderate  abilities  to  remain,  without  effort 
on  their  part,  or  the  ability  which  could  have  placed 
them  there  on  merit,  in  the  upper  class  in  which 
they  were  born ;  but  it  also  saves  an  immense  amount 
of  fruitless  striving  and  sour  disappointment  and 
jealousy  on  the  part  of  those  whose  talents  prove 
unable  to  support  their  ambitions. 

Forces  for  Social  Unity.  Though  the  classes  are 
firmly  set,  yet  they  are  not  castes  compelling  one 
to  remain  in  the  station  of  his  birth.  Even  the 
nobility  is  being  constantly  recruited  by  men  who 
have  achieved  the  highest  eminence  in  war,  science, 
art,  literature,  business,  etc.  Moreover  all  the 
daughters  of  a  nobleman  and  all  the  sons  except  the 
eldest  are  legally  commoners.  To  these  considera- 
tions has  been  added  the  mutual  respect  of  men  and 
women  of  all  sorts  of  standing  at  the  common  heroic 
sacrifices  in  factory,  hospital,  and  field  since  1914. 
These  all  prevent  the  English  nobility  from  being 
spoiled  by  the  arrogance  and  narrow  class  feeling  of 
the  aristocracies  of  the  continent  of  Europe  or  from 
being  hated  by  the  common  people. 

The  Governing  Class.  Associated  with  the  idea 
of  an  aristocracy  is  that  of  a  governing  class.  This 


358  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

is  fairly  well  defined,  not  in  the  sense  that  they 
possess  any  special  legal  privileges,  but  in  the  sense 
that  they  are  willingly  recognized  as  such  by  the 
masses  of  the  people.  Since  this  governing  class 
is  sharply  divided  into  two  parties,  each  of  them  bids 
heavily  for  the  support  of  the  masses  by  promising 
laws  for  popular  benefit.  England  thus  presents 
the  strange  spectacle  of  a  country  whose  govern- 
ment is  conducted  by  the  wealthy  and  aristocratic 
classes,  and  yet  has  upon  its  statute  book  more  laws 
for  the  benefit  of  the  masses  than  many  countries 
of  a  much  more  democratic  society. 

The  governing  class  is  generally  recruited  from 
the  aristocracy  and  the  wealthy  business  and  pro- 
fessional classes  and  from  men  of  independent  in- 
come. Not  all  members  of  these  classes  care  for 
public  life;  but  with  a  large  proportion  of  them, 
politics  are  of  absorbing  interest,  for  success  in  which 
they  are  willing  to  spend  large  sums  without  any 
prospect  of  financial  reward.  As  Professor  Lowell 
remarks,  *  office  is  rarely  if  ever  used  to  obtain  wealth, 
but  wealth  is  freely  used  as  a  means  of  obtaining 
office.  Whether  this  attitude  of  the  governing  class 
has  back  of  it  a  sort  of  semi-consciousness  that  the 
perpetuity  of  the  whole  social  and  economic  structure 
which  they  find  so  agreeable  depends  upon  their 
retention  of  power,  would  be  an  interesting  question. 

'II.,  510-11. 


Aristocracy  and  Democracy        359 

Politics  as  a  Profession.  Men  of  political  ambi- 
tion usually  enter  Parliament  in  early  life.  They 
thus  acquire  a  lifelong  training  which  gives  them  an 
immense  advantage  both  in  the  mastery  of  the 
details  of  public  business  and  in  the  competition  for 
the  higher  political  positions. 

Defects  of  the  System.  As  great  as  are  the  bene- 
fits flowing  from  the  conduct  of  the  government  by 
a  recognized  governing  class,  there  are  also  certain 
disadvantages.  It  is  largely  responsible  for  the 
undemocratic  character  of  the  educational  system, 
the  undemocratic  privileges  of  the  established  church, 
and  the  many  undeserved  advantages  conferred  on 
the  fortunate  by  the  firmly  graded  social  system; 
and  it  doubtless  fosters  in  the  common  people  such 
a  degree  of  reliance  upon  their  "betters"  as  to  be 
unfavourable  to  the  growth  of  self-direction  and  dem- 
ocratic equality  of  opportunity.  Whether  the  masses 
will  continue  to  support  the  system  which  gives  them 
efficient  and  honest  government  and  confers  many 
special  aids  upon  the  poor  and  which  they  can  at 
any  time  rebuke  or  overthrow  by  their  ballots,  or 
whether  with  the  growth  of  self-reliance  as  fostered 
by  the  trade  unions  and  a  higher  grade  of  general 
education  they  will  insist  upon  putting  men  of  their 
own  class  into  possession  of  the  offices,  is  a  question 
which  only  the  future  can  decide.  Certainly  there  ap- 
pears but  slight  tendency  in  that  direction  at  present. 


360  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

Undemocratic  Features.  Though  England  has 
felt  the  wave  of  modern  democracy  very  powerfully, 
she  yet  exhibits  many  features  in  addition  to  those 
already  described  that  are  directly  opposed  to  demo- 
cracy. Chief  of  these  is  the  ownership  of  the  land 
by  a  small  number  of  landlords.1  About  fourteen 
hundred  persons  own  half  the  land  in  England,  and 
in  Scotland  and  Ireland  the  concentration  of  owner- 
ship has  been  still  more  decided,  though  in  Ireland 
great  improvement  has  been  wrought  by  the  land 
purchase  acts.  The  vast  rents  of  these  lands  main- 
tain in  ease  hundreds  of  very  wealthy  men  whose 
existence  is  of  no  benefit  to  the  country.  The  reply 
that  the  class  as  a  whole  is  of  immense  benefit  by 
setting  standards  of  conduct,  social  propriety,  and 
public  service,  is  far  from  convincing  to  persons  not 
directly  the  beneficiaries  of  privilege. 

Democratic  Features.  There  are,  however,  cer- 
tain features  of  the  government  of  England  as  dis- 
tinct from  its  society  that  are  decidedly  democratic. 
Partly  in  a  sincere  desire  to  help  the  masses  and 
partly  in  bidding  for  party  success,  Parliament  has 

1  It  has  been  stated,  on  figures  of  Lord  Derby's  investigation  in 
1874-5,  that  525  peers  own  15,303,165  acres  of  the  48,000,000  acres 
of  cultivated  land  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  and  5,000,000  acres 
of  uncultivated  land,  thus  making  an  ownership  of  20,303, 165  acres  of 
the  total  77,750,000  acres  of  the  entire  area  of  the  United  King- 
dom. The  number  of  acres  transferred  to  small  farmers  of  recent 
years,  said  to  approximate  half  the  area  of  Ireland,  must  be  de- 
ducted from  these  aristocratic  holdings. 


Aristocracy  and  Democracy        361 

passed  a  number  of  laws  such  as  old-age  pensions, 
laws  forcing  employers  to  compensate  injured  work- 
men without  lawsuit,  etc.,  while  the  Councils  of 
large  cities  have  done  much  in  providing  cheap  gas, 
better  homes,  and  other  benefits  for  the  poor. 

American  democracy,  in  its  ruling  idea  of  an  equal 
chance  for  everyone,  cultivates  a  decided  individ- 
ualism, guarantees  a  career  to  ability,  no  matter 
where  born,  and  largely  neglects  the  welfare  of  the 
great  mass  of  commonplace  poor  who  can  never  hope 
to  rise  above  their  surroundings.  England's  demo- 
cracy emphasizes  the  other  side,  and  in  its  attempt 
to  make  the  life  of  the  permanently  poor  as  comfort- 
able and  safe  as  possible,  tends  towards  paternalism 
and  the  decline  of  vigorous  self-reliance.  A  com- 
bination of  the  two  tendencies  would  be  better  than 
either  alone. 

Supremacy  of  the  Voters.  A  still  more  important 
circumstance  making  for  democracy  is  the  fact  that 
in  England  there  is  no  written  constitution  requir- 
ing elaborate  processes  and  extra  majorities  for 
amendment,  by  which  the  will  of  a  few  men  long 
since  dead  may  today  defeat  the  will  of  a  majority 
of  millions  now  living.  A  government  of  checks 
and  balances,  like  that  of  the  United  States,  may  in 
the  long  run  be  safer  and  wiser;  but  the  defeat  of 
the  popular  will  by  these  checks  and  balances  is 
certainly  undemocratic. 


362  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

The  English  idea,  which  is  fast  growing  into  a 
custom,  of  ordering  a  parliamentary  election  when- 
ever the  Ministry  becomes  notably  weak,  and  the 
fact  that  a  defeated  Ministry  must  immediately 
resign  instead  of  holding  on  for  two  or  four  years 
contrary  to  the  recently  expressed  preference  of  the 
people,  as  frequently  with  executive  or  Senate  in 
the  United  States,  also  assures  the  supremacy  of 
the  popular  will  beyond  what  is  possible  under  the 
American  system.  The  recent  movement  in  the 
United  States  for  the  initiative,  referendum,  and 
recall  indicates  a  desire  to  establish  for  the  people 
a  more  effective  means  of  immediate  control. 

Unequal  Size  of  Election  Districts.  The  fact 
that  parliamentary  election  districts  vary  much  in 
relative  population  is  of  not  near  such  significance 
as  is  the  variation  in  population  of  American  States; 
for  the  large  and  small  districts  in  England  do  not 
differ  nearly  so  much  as  do  the  States  of  the  Ameri- 
can Union,  and  are  so  thoroughly  scattered  over  the 
country  as  to  average  up  between  different  sections 
and  parties.  In  this  country,  however,  not  only  is 
the  disproportion  of  population  between  small  and 
large  States  much  more  decided,  but  the  sparsely 
settled  States  are  largely  concentrated  in  the  West 
and  South,  making  it  possible  for  a  small  minority 
of  the  population  of  the  country  situated  in  these 
sections  to  dominate  the  United  States  Senate. 


Aristocracy  and  Democracy        363 

However  wise  some  persons  might  think,  it  is  cer- 
tainly the  very  opposite  of  democratic  that  80,000 
people  in  Nevada  can  nullify  through  their  two 
Senators  the  votes  of  9,000,000  people  in  New  York; 
nor  does  any  reason  appear  for  supposing  that 
Nevada  will  regularly  produce  wiser  voters  or  greater 
Senators  than  the  one  hundred  and  twelve  times 
more  populous  State  of  New  York,  whose  people 
have  the  constant  training  of  managing  the  vast 
interests  and  responsibilities  which  crowd  upon  one 
of  the  world's  greatest  commercial  and  industrial 
centres. 

Since  every  State  is  guaranteed  by  the  Constitu- 
tion equal  representation  in  the  Senate,  we  may  be 
forced  in  time  to  defeat  that  undemocratic  arrange- 
ment in  some  such  manner  as  in  England  they  have 
done  with  the  Lords,  by  enacting  that  any  bill 
shall  become  law  when  passed  by  a  two-thirds  vote 
by  two  succeeding  lower  houses  and  signed  by  the 
President,  without  the  consent  of  the  Senate.  When 
we  marvel  at  the  submission  of  the  English  to  the 
undemocratic  features  in  their  institutions,  let  us 
remember  that  it  is  this  undemocratic  Senate,  and 
not  the  more  representative  House,  that  commands 
the  greater  power  in  our  government  and  generally 
the  greater  respect  and  confidence  of  the  people. 


CHAPTER  XXXIII 

LESSONS  ENGLAND  CAN  TEACH  US 

Flexibility  and  Progress.  Notwithstanding  the 
differences  in  circumstances  between  England  and 
the  United  States,  there  are  several  important 
lessons  in  government  that  our  old  teacher  can  still 
give  us.  One  reason  that  England  has  been  the 
pioneer  in  self-government  is  the  flexibility  of  her 
unwritten  constitution.  In  spite  of  some  dangers 
that  attend  it,  this  leaving  Parliament  unfettered 
allows  the  fullest  freedom  in  meeting  new  needs 
by  the  best  methods.  Itjg^  .agtomsjring  to  observe 
what  a  large  proportion  of  the  highest  intellectual 
effort  in  the  history  of  American  legislation  has 
been  consumed  in  proving,  not  that  proposed 
measures  are  good  or  bad,  but  that  they  are  con- 
stitutional or  unconstitutional.  Thus  the  English 
constitution  is  in  continual  gradual  change,  and  new 
social  and  economic  problems  are  being  experimented 
upon  with  a  freedom  which  is  not  possible  under 
our  rigid  written  constitution. 

364 


Lessons  England  can  Teach  us     365 

Co-operation  of  Legislature  and  Executive.    One 

of  the  most  important  lessons  for  us  is  the  benefit 
to  be  derived  from  a  closer  co-operation  between 
the  legislative  and  executive  departments.  It  is 
common  both  in  our  State  and  national  governments 
to  see  such  serious  quarrels  between  these  two  essen- 
tial agents  in  the  making  of  our  laws  as  to  lead  for  a 
considerable  time  to  an  almost  complete  stoppage 
of  important  legislation.  Though  most  competent 
authorities  agree  that  Cabinet  government  would 
not  be  best  for  the  United  States,  that  is  no  reason 
for  the  extreme  separation  of  legislative  and  execu- 
tive from  which  we  suffer.  Much  can  be  done  to 
make  the  co-operation  between  the  two  departments 
more  effective  without  adopting  the  entire  English 
system  or  impairing  the  valuable  features  of  our 
own.  The  deadlocks,  as  well  as  innumerable  less 
serious  failures  of  co-operation  which  it  is  so  desir- 
able to  avoid,  are  often  due  to  misunderstandings 
between  the  departments,  to  ignorance  of  some  of 
the  circumstances,  or  to  misjudging  the  motives  of 
one  by  the  other.  Nothing  equals  personal  consul- 
tation for  the  removal  of  such  difficulties.  The 
framers  of  the  Confederate  Constitution,  judging 
from  the  experience  of  seventy  years  under  that  of 
the  United  States,  provided  that  Cabinet  officers 
might  speak,  but  not  vote,  in  Congress.  This  could 
be  permitted  under  the  United  States  Constitution. 


366  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

It  would  not  only  give  legislation  greater  unity, 
but  would  lead  to  the  selection  of  stronger  men  for 
Cabinet  positions.  If  it  is  thought  that  this  would 
weaken  the  position  of  the  President,  it  could  be 
arranged  for  him  also  to  appear  on  the  floor  of  Con- 
gress. President  Wilson  has  done  much  to  improve 
the  machinery  of  legislation  by  returning  to  the 
practice  of  Washington  in  delivering  his  important 
messages  in  person ;  and  sooner  or  later  this  co-opera- 
tion in  one  way  or  another  will  doubtless  be  carried 
further.  The  fact  that  we  have  delayed  this  reform 
so  long  is  doubtless  in  large  measure  due  to  the 
deeply  ingrained  feeling  of  hostility  to  the  inter- 
ference of  the  executive  derived  from  the  experience 
of  the  colonies  with  George  III. 

A  Budget  Committee.  A  reform  in  Congressional 
finance,  the  need  of  which  is  generally  recognized, 
is  some  plan  by  which  expenditure  and  income  can 
be  kept  in  closer  agreement.  The  extent  to  which 
steps  have  been  taken  in  American  national,  State, 
and  city  governments  towards  adopting  some  such 
economical  plan  as  the  English  budget  system  is 
described  at  page  142.  Only  the  prodigal  wealth 
of  our  national  government  and  the  desire  of  certain 
powerful  interests  to  keep  expenditure  up  to  a  high 
figure  have  prevented  our  long  ago  ending  the  pre- 
sent shiftless  and  wasteful  system. 

The  Civil  Service.     We  have  in  part  removed  the 


Lessons  England  can  Teach  us     367 

civil  service  from  the  spoils  system;  we  should  fol- 
low the  example  of  England  and  other  leading  Euro- 
pean countries  and  free  it  entirely  from  the  blight 
of  partisan  politics  and  political  corruption. 

We  could  also  elevate  the  quality  of  the  men  and 
women  in  our  civil  service  if  we  adopted  the  English 
idea  of  testing  their  general  character,  education, 
and  ability,  rather  than  their  immediate  preparation 
for  the  positions  for  which  they  apply.  The  Dutch 
abandoned  the  latter  system  after  many  years' 
experience,  because  it  failed  to  secure  men  of  per- 
manent value,  and  adopted  the  English  plan,  based 
upon  the  idea  of  securing  men  and  women  capable 
of  developing  into  strong  public  servants  of  per- 
manent value.1  Our  civil  service  already  suffers 
from  the  presence  of  many  men  of  excellent  prepara- 
tion for  one  task,  but  without  the  originality  or 
force  which  is  necessary  to  permeate  the  govern- 
ment service  with  the  adequate  enlightenment  and 
progress. 

Purity  in  Politics.  While  the  day  is  past  when  a 
leader  in  the  United  States  Senate  would  publicly 
proclaim  that  "purity  in  politics  is  an  iridescent 
dream,"  or  another  in  the  same  position  scoff  at 
civil  service  reform  as  hypocritical  scoundrelism,  * 

1  Lowell,  ii.,  516. 

3  John  J.  Ingalls  is  the  first-named  case;  Roscoe  Conkling  is  the 
other. 


368  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

yet  we  are  far  short  of  the  ideal.  Several  generations 
ago  politics  in  England  were  more  corrupt  than  any- 
where now  in  America  except  the  very  worst  spots. 
Yet  today  public  sentiment  and  law  have  been  so 
far  improved  that  corruption  is  much  rarer  than  in 
our  country,  many  writers  even  going  the  unwarrant- 
able length  of  saying  that  it  is  non-existent.  Eng- 
land's accomplishment  of  this  task  under  conditions 
in  some  respects  more  difficult  to  overcome  than 
those  which  confront  us  should  inspire  Americans 
to  remove  every  stain  of  corruption  from  our  elec- 
tions and  public  officials.  Especially  should  we 
break,  as  they  have  done,  the  power  of  the  great 
corporations  in  politics. 

Log-Rolling.  The  practice  of  one  member  or 
group  of  members  agreeing  to  help  another  with 
their  bill  in  return  for  similar  favours  is  known  as 
log-rolling,  from  the  frontier  habit  of  neighbours 
helping  each  other  in  clearing  their  fields  or  forests. 
But  unhappily  political  log-rolling  is  not  so  legiti- 
mate a  form  of  co-operation  as  the  agricultural,  for 
the  reason  that  it  is  generally  resorted  to  in  order 
to  secure  the  passage  of  laws  which  could  not  get 
a  majority  on  their  merits.  So  long  as  our  economic 
and  legislative  system  remains  as  it  is,  we  cannot 
escape  this  evil  entirely;  but  our  people  and  public 
men  alike  should  employ  every  means  possible  of 
discouraging  this  semi-corrupt  practice. 


Lessons  England  can  Teach  us     369 

The  lesson  of  united  executive  responsibility  and 
the  control  by  State  authority  over  the  administra- 
tors of  commonwealth  law  which  English  experience 
holds  for  our  State  governments  is  one  of  the  most 
useful  and  impressive  of  any  she  can  teach.  This 
has  been  so  fully  treated  above  on  pages  253-6  as 
not  to  require  repetition  here. 

Regard  for  Law.  Finally,  England  can  teach  us 
very  effectively  the  lesson  of  regard  for  law.  Cer- 
tain forces  in  our  development  have  led  high  and 
low,  rich  and  poor  alike,  to  treat  law  with  slight 
regard  when  it  crosses  their  own  self-will  or  greed. 
The  rate  of  homicide  in  the  United  States  as  a  whole 
is  six  or  seven  times  as  great  as  in  England,  and  in 
some  States  twenty  times  as  great,  while  many  of 
our  trust  magnates  have  been  as  flagrant  in  their 
contempt  for  all  legal  authority  as  bandits  or  train 
robbers.  Too  often  our  courts  have  not  seriously 
cared;  for  the  current  disregard  for  the  sacred  rights^ 
of  individuals  has  so  permeated  them  along  with 
the  rest  of  the  community  at  large  that  juries  acquit 
of  the  most  heinous  crimes,  judges  frequently  impose 
almost  farcical  sentences  on  desperate  criminals, 
and  even  State  supreme  courts  often  foster  crime 
and  injustice  by  reversing  long  and  expensive  pro- 
ceedings in  which  a  just  verdict  has  been  at  last 
obtained  because  of  some  trifling  technicality  not 
affecting  the  merits  of  the  case  in  the  remotest 


24 


37°  Social  and  Political  Characteristics 

degree.1  We  might  well  follow  the  example  of  the 
country  from  which  we  derived  our  law  and  govern- 
ment by  making  the  one  a  terror  to  the  evil-doer  and 
the  other  a  protection  beneath  which  all  good  citizens 
may  feel  secure. 

And  lastly,  let  us  feel  about  our  government,  as 
the  Englishman  does  about  his,  that  it  is  the  greatest 
and  wisest  and  freest  in  all  the  world,  and  that  it 
must  never  be  dishonoured  by  falling  into  the  hands 
of  self-seeking  and  dishonourable  men. 

1  A  French  critic  says  that  many  American  officials  seem  to  have 
adopted  that  part  of  the  motto  of  the  Japanese  monkeys  that  says, 
"See  no  evil;  hear  no  evil." 


A  BRIEF  READING  LIST 

This  brief  list  is  intended  as  a  guide  for  general 
reading,  not  for  detailed  investigation.  Such  cita- 
tions as  are  made  for  that  purpose  are  found  in  the 
footnotes. 

ALEXANDER,  G.  G.  The  Administration  of  Justice  in 
Criminal  Matters  in  England  and  Wales.  [Cam- 
bridge University  Press,  1911. 

American  Year  Book.    Appleton,  New  York. 

BAGEHOT,  WALTER.  The  English  Constitution.  Apple- 
ton,  New  York,  1904. 

COURTNEY,  L.  H.  The  Working  Constitution  of  the 
United  Kingdom.  Macmillan,  1901. 

CROSS,  J.  L.  The  History  of  England  and  Great  Britain. 
Macmillan,  New  York,  1914. 

Cyclopedia  Britannica,  nth  edition.  Numerous  articles 
by  title. 

DICEY,  A.  V.  The  Law  of  the  Constitution.  Macmillan, 
London,  1908. 

EGERTON,  H.  E.  Federations  and  Unions  in  the  British 
Empire.  Clarendon  Press,  Oxford,  1911.  (Text  of 
Canadian,  Australian,  and  South  African  Constitu- 
tions, with  brief  historical  and  legal  explanations.) 

HOWE,  F.  C.  The  British  City.  Scribners,  New  York, 
1907. 

ILBERT,  SIR  COURTENAY  P.  Parliament.  Holt,  New 
York,  1911. 

37i 


372  A  Brief  Reading  List 

LE ACOCK,  STEPHEN.  Elements  of  Political  Science. 
Houghton,  Boston  and  New  York,  1906. 

LEFROY,  A.  H.  F.  Canada's  Federal  System.  Carswell 
&  Co.,  Toronto,  1913. 

Low,  SIDNEY.  The  Governance  of  England.  Unwin, 
London,  1911. 

LOWELL,  E.  J.  The  Government  of  England.  2  vols. 
Macmillan,  New  York,  1908. 

MACY,  JESSE.  The  English  Constitution.  Macmillan, 
New  York,  1909. 

MARRIOTT,  J.  A.  R.  English  Political  Institutions. 
Clarendon  Press,  Oxford,  1913. 

MEDLEY,  D.  J.  Student's  Manual  of  English  Constitu- 
tional History.  Macmillan,  New  York,  or  Blackwell, 
Oxford,  1913. 

MORAN,  T.  F.  The  Theory  and  Practice  of  the  English 
Government.  Longmans,  New  York,  1908. 

OGG,  F.  A.  The  Governments  of  Europe.  Macmillan, 
New  York,  1913. 

PORRITT,  EDWARD.  The  Englishman  at  Home.  Crowell, 
New  York,  1893. 

Statesman's  Year  Book.     Macmillan,  London. 

WEBB,  SIDNEY,  and  BEATRICE.  English  Local  Govern- 
ment. 3  vols.  Longmans,  New  York,  1907-8. 

WILSON,  WOODROW.     The  State.     Heath,  Boston,  1901. 


INDEX 


Aberdeen,  Lord,  138 

Absolute  governments,  5 

Adams,  John,  54 

Administrative  counties,  244- 
245;  of  London,  259, 26 1-262 

Administrator,  in  South  Africa, 
298 

Admiralty,  First  Lord  of,  147; 
cases,  appeal  in,  194,  n.  2; 
courts  and  cases,  197—198. 
See  also  First  Lord  of 
Admiralty 

Afghanistan,  5 

Africa,  government  of  un- 
civilized parts,  306.  See 
also  South  Africa 

Agent,  in  politics  and  elections, 
210;  colonial,  272 

Agriculture,  department  of,  153 

Agriculture  and  Fisheries,  Presi- 
dent Board  of,  131 

Aldermen,  232-233 

Amendment  of  constitution, 
English,  13;  Australian,  295; 
American,  296 

Appeal,  from  Petty  Sessions, 
1 66;  power  of  Quarter 
Sessions,  171;  in  equity 
cases,  194,  n.  2;  to  House  of 
Lords,  201;  from  Irish 
courts,  280;  from  Australian 
courts,  294-295;  from 
Canadian  courts,  288;  from 
South  African  courts,  301; 
in  church  cases,  346; 
mentioned,  179,  180 

—  Court  of,  179;  members  and 
jurisdiction,  199-200 


—  Court  of  Criminal,  179;   not 

part  of  Supreme  Court  of 
Judicature,  201 

—  Lords    of,    82-83,    154;    °n 

Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council,  202 

Applause,  73 

Appointments,  109,  137 

Archbishops,  342.  See  also 
Bishops 

Archdeacons,  343  and  n. 

Aristocracy,  compared  with 
democracy,  354  et  seq.; 
ownership  of  land,  356  and 
n. 

Arms,  coat  of,  356,  n.  2 

Army,  26,  146-147;  in  India,  324 

Asquith,  H.  H.,  135,  155 

Assizes  of  High  Court  of  Justice, 
jurisdiction;  relations  to 
other  courts,  178;  co-ordin- 
ate with  King's  Bench 
Division;  no  appeal  to,  from 
lower  courts,  179;  sessions 
and  business,  197;  men- 
tioned, 167,  176 

Attorney-General,  130,  131, 
155-156,  182,  183;  in 
appeals,  201 

—  for  Ireland,  132 
Auditor-General,  253 
Australia,  drafting  Constitution 

of,  282;  government  of, 
291  et  seq.',  Supreme  Court, 
292;  federal  Parliament, 
292-293 ;  Governor-Gen- 
eral, 293;  government  of, 
contrasted  with  those  of 
Canada  and  South  Africa, 
298-301 


373 


374 


Index 


B 


Balfour,  A.  J.,  138,  139 

Baroda,  325 

Barons,  83 

Barristers,  205 

Beaconsfield,  Lord.    See  Disraeli 

Bills,  procedure  on,  60  et  seq.; 
number  in  England  and 
United  States,  72-73 

Births  and   deaths,  registration, 

!50 

Bishops,  in  House  of  Lords,  82, 
83,  n.;  dioceses,  341;  suffra- 
gans, 342;  appointment  of, 
344-345;     in    Parliament; 
powers,  345;  mentioned,  229 
Blockade,  Minister  of,  146 
Board     of     Agriculture     and 
Fisheries,  131 

—  of  Education,  President  of,  131 

—  of  Trade,  150-152;  President 

of,  131 

Boroughs,  members  of  Parlia- 
ment from,  30-31;  classes 
of,  229-230;  Councils,  231 
et  seq.-,  suffrage,  236-237; 
charters,  237;  central  con- 
trol; contribution  of  central 
government  to  finances  of, 
238;  of  London,  261.  See 
also  Municipal  government, 
and  County  boroughs 

Boston,  65 

Bright,  John,  74    "l 

British  Columbia,  272 

British  Empire,  character  of, 
267-269;  no  tribute, 
268-269;  advantage  to 
England,  269-270;  means  of 
control,  273;  future  of,  329 

British  North  America  Act, 
285,  288,  292,  295 

Bryce,  Lord,  73 

Budget,  preparation  of  English, 
142;  need  of,  in  Congress, 
366;  mentioned,  63-66 

Bundesrath,  115 


Cabinet,      development,      104; 
leaders  of   majority   party, 


43;  distinguished  from  Min- 
istry, 44;  leadership  of, 
52-53>  60;  future  of,  120- 
121,  124;  inner  circle]  of, 
122;  unknown  to  law,  124; 
meetings  and  discussions; 
unity  of,  126;  positions  in, 
130-131;  mentioned,  15. 
See  also  Ministry. 

Cambridge  University,  351 

Campbell  -  Bannennan,  Sir 
Henry,  139 

Canada,  drafting  constitution 
of,  282;  government  of, 
283  et  seq.;  Governor- 
General,  284-286;  Ministry, 
286-287;  Supreme  Court, 
287-288;  relations  of  pro- 
vinces and  Dominion,  289; 
government  of,  contrasted 
with  those  of  Australia  and 
South  Africa,  298-301 ;  men- 
tioned, 5 

Candidates,  Parliamentary,  se- 
lecting, 2 1  o,  217 

Canterbury,  province  of,  341; 
Archbishop  of,  342;  Con- 
vocation of,  343;  other 
assemblies  of,  344 

Cape  of  Good  Hope,  297 

Casement,  Sir  Roger,  185 

Cathedral,  343 

Catholics.}  See  Roman  Catholics 

Central  control  over  local  gov- 
ernment, 252—256 

Central  Criminal  Court,  203 

Centralized  government,  5,  7 

Chamberlain,  Lord,  132 

Chancellor.  See  Lord  High 
Chancellor 

Chancellor  of  the  Duchy  of 
Lancaster,  122,  131 

—  of    the    Exchequer,  general 

oversight,  140;  preparing 
estimates;  control  over  other 
departments,  141;  budget, 
142;  mentioned,  64,  130 
Chancery  court,  190.  See  also 
Equity 

—  Division  of  the  High   Court 

of  Justice,  appellate  juris- 
diction, 194,  n.  2;  judges  of, 
197;  duties,  198 


Index 


375 


Chapter,  cathedral,  343 

Charles  I.,  1 12 

Charles  II.,  107 

Charter,  borough,  237;  of 
colony,  304 

Chatham,  Lord,  85 

Chief  Justice,  England.  See 
Lord  Chief  Justice. 

—  of  United  States,  153 

Chief  Secretary  to  Lord  Lieu- 
tenant of  Ireland,  131 

Children,  before  courts,  167,  n.  I 

Chiltern  Hundreds,  79 

China,  86 

Church,  supreme  court  of  appeal 
for,  203;  the  established, 
337  et  seq.;  support  of; 
tithes,  338-339;  govern- 
ment control,  341 ;  Convoca- 
tion, 342;  House  of  Laymen; 
Representative  Church  As- 
sembly, 344;  bishops  and 
dioceses,  341,  344;  future 
of  establishment,  347;  in 
Scotland,  348 

Circuits,  177 

Cities,  importance  of,  in  England, 
229.  See  also  Boroughs, 
and  Municipal  government 

Civil  service,  officials  excluded 
from  Parliament,  158; 
examinations  for,  159-161; 
pensions,  163;  in  English 
cities,  235;  colonial,  307; 
Indian,  322;  merit  system 
in  various  countries,  366- 

367 

Classes,  in  English  society, 
354  et  seq.;  governing, 

357-359 

Clergy,  ordination  and  appoint- 
ment, 345-346 

Clerk,  of  borough,  136;  of  Petty 
Sessions,  165;  of  Peace,  168, 
170 

Clive,  Lord,  85,  308 

Cloture,  75 

Colonial  Secretary.  See  Secre- 
tary of  State  for  Colonies 

Colonies,  relations  with  mother 
country,  267  et  seq.;  classes 
of,  271;  Agents,  272;  self- 
governing,  281  et  seq.  See 


also  Secretary  of  State  for 
Colonies 

Commissioner,  Lord  High,  of 
Egypt,  327 

—  of  Works,  131 

Commission  government  for 
American  cities,  232 

Committee  of  Imperial  Defence, 
148 

Committees,  in  Parliament,  60, 
64-65,  68-70;  m  Congress, 
60;  of  political  parties, 
209—212;  of  Borough  Coun- 
cils, 234;  in  County  Coun- 
cils, 247 

Common  law,  12  and  n.,  188, 190 

Commons,  House  of,  growth  of 
power,  22  et  seq.;  numbers, 
29;  members  not  required  to 
live  in  district,  35;  salary 
and  expenses  of  members, 
36-37;  qualifications  for 
membership,  38;  term,  39, 
50;  dissolution,  39;  resigna- 
tion from,  79-80;  origin  of 
House,  101-102;  impeach- 
ment by,  1 02.  See  also 
Parliament. 

Comptroller-General,  253 

Confederacy,  Southern,  Con- 
stitution, 365 

Congress,  United  States,  un- 
representative, 30  and  n.  I ; 
compared  with  Parliament, 
51,  60;  mentioned,  20,  35 

Conkling,  Roscoe,  367,  n.  2 

Conservatives,  organization,  211, 
214;  contrasted  with  Liber- 
als, etc.,  215-216 

Constitution,  written  and  un- 
written, 9-10;  English,  II 
et  seq.;  amending  Austra- 
lian, 295;  amending  Ameri- 
can, 296 

Constitutional  government,  5,  6 

Continental  Congress,  55-56 

Conventions,  political,  211 

Conveyancing  Counsel,  194,  n.  2 

Convocation,  342-344 

Copyrights,  151 

Corruption,  political,  rare  in 
English  politics,  231-232, 
241;  mentioned,  220-221 


376 


Index 


Council,  Borough,  231  et  seq.; 
committees  of,  234;  County, 
245  et  seq.  i  London  County; 
London  Borough,  261-262; 
of  Governor-General  of 
India,  313;  Legislative,  of 
India,  see  Legislative 
Council  of  India 

Counties,  members  of  Parlia- 
ment from,  30;  government 
of,  243  et  seq.]  divisions  of; 
administrative,  244,  250 
et  seq.]  Councils,  244-248; 
suffrage,  246,  250;  central 
control  over,  248;  London, 
259,  261-262 

County  boroughs,  34,  n.,  230 

—  Courts,   193  et  seq.;  jurisdic- 

tion; appeals  from,  194  and 
n.  2,  200;  juries  in,  195 
Court  of  Appeal,  hears  appeals 
from  Railway  and  Canal 
Commission,  152;  members 
and  jurisdiction,  199-200 

—  of  Criminal  Appeal,  180-182, 

184,  20 1.     See  also  Appeal 
Courts,      Canadian,      288-289; 
civil,  187  et  seq.;     table  of, 
following     page    372.     See 
also  Assize,  Central  Crimi- 
nal Court,  Chancery  Divi- 
sion, King's  Bench  Division, 
Probate,  Divorce,  and  Ad- 
miralty  Division   of    High 
Court   of  Justice,   County 
Courts,  High  Court  of  Jus- 
tice, Petty  Sessions,  Quar- 
ter Sessions,  Supreme  Court, 
Supreme  Court  of  Judicature 
Crorrier,  Lord,  85,  308 
Crown,  succession  to,  98-99 
Crown  colonies,  government  of, 
304  et  seq.;  classes  of,  304- 
306 

Cuba,  5 

Curzon,  Lord,  123,  322,  n.  2,  331 
Custom  of  the  Constitution,  12 


Deans,  343,  n. 

Deaths  and  births,  registration, 
150 


Democracy,  English  and  Ameri- 
can, 218-220;  democracy 
and  aristocracy  traced,  354 
et  seq.;  in  English  politics, 
360-362 

Democrats  and  republicans,  215 

Derby,  Lord,  48,  138,  139 

Diocese,  341  et  seq. 

Director  of  Public  Prosecutions, 
183  . 

Disestablishment  of  church, 
in  Wales,  341,  n.;  general 
question  of,  347-348;  in 
Ireland,  348 

Disraeli,  Benjamin,  73,  85,  139 

Dissenters,  statistics,  348,  n.  I 

Dissolution,  50 

District,    Indian   governmental, 

^.  .  320 

Division,  77 

Divorce,  198 
Dominions,  282,  302 
Dukes,  83 


Earls,  83 

Education,  department  of,  153; 
president  board  of,  131; 
general,  349  et  seq.;  com- 
pulsory, 350;  religious  ques- 
tion, 351;  in  Scotland  and 
Ireland,  353 

Edward  VII.,  113 

Egypt,  English  government  in, 
327-329;  annexed  to  British 
Empire;  Sultan;  Ministry, 
327;  legislative  assembly; 
local  government,  328; 
effects  of  British  rule,  329 

Elections,  parliamentary,  46, 
49,  217  et  seq.;  expenses  of, 
220;  corruption,  220;  by 
plurality,  221-222;  munici- 
pal, 240 

Empire,  British.  See  British 
Empire 

Episcopalians,  statistics,  348, 
notes  i  and  2.  See  also 
Established  church 

Equity,  189-192;  appeals  in, 
194,  n.  2 

Established  church,  116 


Index 


377 


351 

Examinations,  for  civil  service, 
159-161 

Executive,  Prime  Minister  head 
of,  104;  in  legislature,  120; 
co-operation  with  legisla- 
tures, 365  et  seq. ;  Canadian, 
290-291  passim 

Experts  as  borough  employees, 
235-236 


F 


Federal  government,  5,  7;  forms 
of,  in  various  countries,  298 
Federation,  imperial,  333 
First  Commissioner  of  Works, 

I31 

—  Lord  of  the  Admiral t}',  131, 

147 

—  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  122, 130 
Fisheries.     See  Agriculture   and 

Fisheries 

Food  Controller,  146 
Foreign    affairs,    IJ2— 115.     See 

also  Secretary    of  State  for 

Foreign  Affairs 
France,  5,  86 
Franklin,  Benjamin,  303 


General  Staff,  148 

George  III.,  256,  366 

George  V.,  313 

Germany,  comparison  with,  115; 

federal  government  in,  299; 

otherwise  mentioned,  5,  7, 

t.  Ji45'  331 
Gibraltar,  306 

Gladstone,  W.  E.,  48,  64,  118, 
135,  138,  139,  HO 

Government,  varieties  of,  4-9 

Governor,  in  United  States, 
legal  status,  HI,  n.,  1 12, 
n. ;  lack  of  proper  authority, 
253-256;  of  Australian  state, 
294;  of  self-governing  col- 
onies, 302,  304;  of  colonies, 
how  chosen,  308;  of  Indian 
province,  318-319 

Governor-General,  Australia, 
293;  Canada,  284-286;  of 


India,  appointment  and 
powers.  312-313,  318-319; 
South  Africa,  297 

Grand  Mogul,  326 

Grey,  Lord,  138 


H 


Habeas  corpus,  II 
Harrow,  351 
Hartington,  Lord,  48 
Hats,  75 

High  Court,  Australia.    See  Su- 
preme Court,  Australia 

—  Court  of  Justice,  appellate  jur- 

isdiction, 1 66,  172;  divisions 
of  197-198;  composition 
and  character,  199;  other- 
wise mentioned,  176 
Hindus,  number  of,  310,  n.; 
rivalry  with  Mohammedans, 
320 

Home  Rule.     See  Ireland 
Honours,  influence  of  money,  85 
House  of  Commons.    See  Com- 
mons, House  of 

—  of  Laymen,  344 

—  of  Lords.     See  Lords,  House 

of 

—  of    Representatives,    United 

States,  bills  in,  72-73;  Cana- 
dian, 287 

Household  officials,  132 

Hungary,  9,  IO 


Impeachments,  40-41,  102-103 

and  n. 

Imperial  conferences,  332 
-  federation,  333 

India,  army,  324;  aspirations, 
310;  juries,  law,  and  judi- 
ciary, 323-324;  British  resi- 
dent, 326;  government  of, 
309  et  seq.-,  Governor-Gen- 
eral of,  312-313;  Governor- 
General's  Council,  313-314; 
Legislative  Council  of,  314- 
316;  participation  of  natives 
in  government,  322;  num- 
ber of  officials,  322,  n.  2; 
governmental  districts,  320; 


378 


Index 


I  ndia —  Continued 

municipal  government,  321 ; 
civil  service,  322;  native 
estimate  of  British  govern- 
ment, 330-331;  in  Great 
War,  330-331 ;  native  states, 
312,  325;  population,  races, 
and  religions,  309  and  n.  2 ; 
provinces,  318-319 

Indian  National  Congress,  319 
and  n.  2 

Indictment,  175 

Ingalls,  John  ).,  367,  n.  2 

Inns  of  Court,  205 

Instructions  to  colonial  Gover- 
nor, 304 

Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission, 151 

Ireland,  church  in;  religious 
statistics,  348  and  n.  2; 
education  in,  353;  union 
with  Great  Britain,  18  n.; 
suffrage,  34  n.;  supreme 
court  of  appeal  for,  203, 
206-207;  representation  in 
Imperial  Parliament;  ditto 
under  Home  Rule  Act, 
275,  279  n«;  local  govern- 
ment in,  256;  women  in 
politics,  257;  Home  Rule 
Act,  29,  n.  I,  30,  n.  2,  39, 
274-280;  passage  and  sus- 
pension of,  275;  limitations 
upon  Home  Rule,  277-280; 
transfer  of  land  to  cultiva- 
tors, 278  and  n.  2 


Joint  Secretaries  of  the  Treas- 
ury, 131  a 

Judges,  functions,  172;  appoint- 
ment and  tenure  in  Eng- 
land, 137,  203-204;  ditto  in 
Canada,  288-289;  salaries, 
204;  India,  324;  power  of, 
in  England  and  United 
States,  183,  184 

Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council,  membership,  202; 
duties,  203;  in  relation  to 
Ireland,  207,  280;  appel- 
late jurisdiction,  288,  294- 


295;  in  church  cases,  346; 
otherwise  mentioned,  154 

Jurisdiction,  original,  appellate, 
concurrent,  169,  179 

Jury,  and  juror,  functions,  172; 
right  to  trial  by,  173; 
grand  and  petit,  174;  none 
in  equity  cases,  except, 
191  and  n.  2;  in  civil  and 
criminal  cases;  qualifica- 
tions; classes;  fees,  196- 
197;  in  India,  323-324 

Justice,  department  of,  duties 
distributed,  153 

Justices  of  the  peace,  164-170; 
powers  of  single,  165;  in 
petty  sessions,  166; in  quar- 
ter sessions,  167;  non- 
judicial  duties,  204 


K 


Keeper  of  the  Great  Seal,  132 

Kelvin,  Lord,  85 

Khedive,  327 

King,  as  part  of  Parliament, 
19,  21 ;  decline  of  power, 
22,  102;  not  real  executive, 
42;  speech  from  the  throne, 
57-58;  signing  bills,  62-63; 
general  account  of,  98-119; 
statutory  powers  of,  105; 
legal  title,  309  and  n.  i; 
head  of  established  church, 
340;  powers  over^  Convoca- 
tion, 342;  in  appointment  of 
bishops,  345.  See  also 
Crown 

King's  Bench,  Court  of,  abol- 
ished, 178,  n. 

—  Bench  Division  of  High  Court 
of  Justice,  jurisdiction^  179, 
1 80,  194,  198;  co-ordinate 
with  Assize,  179;  judges,  197 

Kitchener,  Lord,  84,  n.,  135 

Knights,  355 


La  Follette,  R.  M.,  296 

Land,  owned  by  lords,  84,  360 
and  n.;  ownership  of,  in 
Ireland,  278  and  n.  2 


Index 


379 


Lansdowne,  Lord,  48 

Law,  practice  of,  205-206;  re- 
gard for,  369;  enforcement 
of,  in  United  States,  252- 
256;  Indian,  323 

Law,  Andrew  Bonar,  123 

Lawyers,  205 

Laymen,  House  of,  344 

Lay  patronage,  345,  348 

Legislative  Council,  of  India, 
314-316;  of  Indian  pro- 
vinces, 317 

Legislature,  co-operation  with 
executive,  365  et  seq. 

Liberals,  organization,  211,  214; 
contrasted  with  Conserva- 
tives, etc.,  215-216 

Lieutenant-Governor,  of  Cana- 
dian province,  290-291;  of 
Indian  province,  318-319 

Lincolnshire,  167 

Lister,  Lord,  85 

Lloyd-George,  David,  123,  139, 

Local  government,  subject  to 
central  control,  227-228, 
252-256;  English  and 
American,  227-228 

Local  Government  Board,  Presi- 
dent of,  131;  authority  over 
local  governments,  248—249, 
252;  otherwise  mentioned, 

150 

Log-rolling,  65  and  n.,  368 
London,  "city"  of;  Parliamen- 
tary representation,  31,  n. 
i;  criminal  court  for,  203; 
government  of,  258  et  seq.; 
ancient  ^charter,  258;  ad- 
ministrative county  of ;  Met- 
ropolitan and  City  Police 
District,  259;  Common 
Council  of  "the  city";  Lord 
Mayor,  260;  suffrage,  260- 
261;  boroughs  of  county; 
County  Council,  261;  poli- 
tics, 262;  Metropolitan 
Boards,  263 
Lord  Advocate,  131,  132 

—  Chancellor  for  Ireland,  132 

—  Chief  Justice,    on    Court   of 

Appeal,  199;  otherwise  men- 
tioned, 137,  181 


—  High     Chancellor,     presides 

over  Lords,  96,  154-155; 
appointment^  137;  judicial 
duties;  appointing  power, 
154-155,  203-204,  346;  on 
Court  of  Appeal,  199;  on 
Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council,  202;  otherwise 
mentioned,  131,  153,  182, 
190,  192 

—  High  Commissioner  of  Egypt, 

327 

—  Justice  Clerk,  132 

—  Justice  General,  132 

—  Keeper  of  the  Privy  Seal,  122, 

132 

—  Lieutenant  of  Ireland,    132, 

276,  279 

—  Mayor  of  London,  258,  260 

—  President  of  the  Council,  122, 

131 

—  Privy  Seal,  131 

Lords  (as  individuals),  wealth, 
84;  trial,  88;  influence  of 
money  in  securing  titles, 
85;  privileges  and  disad- 
vantages, 38-39,  87,  355- 
356  and  n.  i;  ownership  of 
land,  360  and  n.  •-  -1 

—  House  of,   private  bills,   24 

and  n.;  part  in  legislation, 
63,  69;  origin,  81;  composi- 
tion, 82-84;  decline  in  power, 
22  et  seq.,  go  et  seq.\  relation 
to  Ministry,  94-95;  pro- 
cedure, 95-97;  value  of,  94, 
97;  try  impeachments,  103; 
appeals  to,  152,  201,  280; 
oppose  Irish  Home  Rule,  274 

—  of  Appeal,  182 

Loyalty,  versus  compulsion,  as 
an  imperial  binder,  303 

M 

Macaulay,  Lord,  85,  161 
Magna  Charta,  II,  101 
Marquises,  83 
Mary,  Queen,  loo,  n. 
Master  of  the  Horse,  132 

—  of   the   Rolls,    on    Court    of 

Appeal,  200;  former  duties, 
200,  n.  I 


380 


Index 


Masters  (equity),  194,  n.  2 

Mayor,  231,  234 

Melbourne,  Lord,  138 

Members  of  Parliament,  salary, 
219;  relations  with  con- 
stituency, 222 

Metropolitan  Boards,  259,  260, 
263 

Mexico,  5 

Minister  of  Munitions,  131, 144- 
146 

Ministers,  re-election  on  appoint- 
ment, 79;  removal  of,  103; 
without  Portfolio,  123;  re- 
strictions on,  127.  See  also 

,        Ministry,  and  Cabinet 

Ministry,  Australian,  293 

—  British,    distinguished    from 

Cabinet,  44,  120-121,  131; 
responsible,  45  et  seq.',  rela- 
tions with  Lords,  94-95; 
difficulty  of  forming,  125; 
power  over  Ireland,  279 

—  Canadian,  286-287 

—  Egyptian,  327 

—  Irish,  277.     See  also  Cabinet 
Minto,  Lord,  319 
Moderates,  240 
Mohammedans,     representation 

of,  318;  rivalry  with  Hindus, 
320 

Money,  influence  of,  in  politics, 
213,  218-221 

—  bills,  control  of  by  Commons, 

24-26 

Montfort,  Simon  de,  101 
Morley,  Lord,  319 
Municipal  government,  in  India, 

321.     See    also    Boroughs, 

and  Cities  ^ 
Munitions,    Minister    of,     131, 

144-146 


N 


Naming  a  member,  74 

Napoleon,  123 

Natal,  political  status  of  negroes 

in,  297,  n. 

National  Liberal  Federation,  211 
Native  states  of  India,  312,  316, 

325 

Navy  department,  147 


Negroes,  political  status  of,  in 

South  Africa,  297  and  n. 
Nelson,  Lord,  85 
Nevada,  30,  n.  I,  363 
Newfoundland,  government  of, 

301-302 
New  York,  State,  30,  n.  I,  363; 

city,  65,  264 

New  Zealand,  282,  301-302 
Nobility,  354;  recruited  by  men 

of  talent,  357 
Nominations   of   Parliamentary 

candidate,  210 
Nova  Scotia,  289 
Nursing  constituencies,  218 


Opposition,  the,  58-59 
Orders  in  Council,  116 
Oxford  University,  351 


Palmerston,  Lord,  48,  139 

Papua,  292 

Pardons,  no,  185 

Parish,  251 

Parliament,  British,  18  et  seq., 
time  of  meeting,  27;  pro- 
roguing and  dissolving,  28; 
duration,  41;  salary  of 
members,  219;  supremacy 
of,  281;  policy  towards 
India,  310;  Australian,  292 ; 
Canadian,  286-287;  Irish, 
275-277;  South  African,  297. 
See  also  Commons,  and 
Lords 

Parliament  Act  of  1911,  23-24, 

93-94 

Parliamentary  government,  5, 
8 

—  Secretary  of  Treasury,  76 

Parties.     See  Political  parties 

Patents,  151 

Patronage  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury, 76,  131 

Peel,  Sir  Robert,  138 

Peeresses,  84,  n. 

Peers.     See  Lords 

Pensions,  old  age,  150;  civil 
service,  163 


Index 


Petty  Sessions,  Court  of,  dealing 
with  children,  167,  n.  i; 
appeal  from,  171,  179; 
otherwise  mentioned,  166 

Platform,  political,  211-212 

Plural  voting,  35,  n. 

Political  parties,  comparison  be- 
tween English  and  Ameri- 
can, 208;  local ^  organiza- 
tions, 209;  national  con- 
ventions, 21 1 ;  national  com- 
mittees, 212;  raising  funds, 
213;  women  workers,  213- 
214;  contrast  between  Con- 
servatives and  Liberals,  215- 
216 

Politics,  208  et  seq.'  purity  of 
English,  220;  absence  of, 
from  English  city  govern- 
ment, 239-242;  in  London 
County  Council,  262;  pro- 
fession of  governing  class, 
359;  corruption  in,  367. 
See  also  Political  parties 

Poor  Law  Unions,  251 

—  relief,  150 

Postmaster-General,  131,  152 
Postoffice,  152 
Prerogative,  105,  108-115 
Presbyterians,  348  and  n.  2 
Presidential  government,  5,  8 
President  of  Board  of  Agricul- 
ture and  Fisheries,  131 

—  of  Board  of  Education,  131 

—  of  Board  of  Trade,  131,  150 

—  of  the  Council,  131 

—  of  Local  Government  Board, 

—  131 

—  of  United  States,  immunity 

from  arrest,  in,  n.;  suits 
against,  112,  n.;  compared 
with  Prime  Minister,  134 
Prime  Minister,  British,  writes 
King's  speech,  ^7;  power 
over  established  church,  1 1 6 ; 
development,  133 ;  general 
character  of  position,  134; 
general  supervision  by,  136; 
appointing  power,  137,  284, 
293,  312;  list  of  Prime  Min- 
isters, 138-139;  settles  differ- 
ences between  Ministers, 
141 ;  on  Committee  of  Imper- 


ial Defence,  148;  in  imperial 
conferences,  332;  otherwise 
mentioned,  104-105 

—  Canadian,   285;    colonial,    in 

imperial  conferences,  332 
Private  bills,  67  et  seq. 
Private  member  bills,  67  et  seq. 
Privy    Council,    117-118,    124, 

125,  279.     See  also  Judicial 

Committee    of    the    Privy 

Council 

—  Seal,  131 

Probate,  Divorce  and  Admiralty, 
Division  of  the  High  Court 
of  Justice,  judges,  ^197; 
jurisdiction,  198;  President 
of,  on  Court  of  Appeal, 
200 

Progressives,  240 

Prosecutions,  183 

Protectorates,  325-327 

Protestants,  statistics,  348,  notes 
1  I  and  2 

Provinces,  Canadian,  289,  290- 
291;  Indian,  318-319;  South 
African,  298 

Prussia,  5 


Q 


Quarter  Sessions,  jurisdiction, 
169,  170-171;  appeal  from, 
179;  otherwise  mentioned, 
167 

Quebec,  280 


R 


Races,  in  India,  309  and  n.  2;  in 

Ireland,  274 
Railroads,    government    super- 

^  vision,  150-152 
Railway  and  Canal  Commission, 

appeals  from,  200;  otherwise 

mentioned,  151 
Register,  Lord  Justice,  132 
Religion    in     school     question, 

351-353 

Religious  sects  in  India,  310,  n.; 
in  British  Isles,  348,  notes 
I  and  2 

Representative  Church  As- 
sembly, 344 


382 


Index 


Republicans,  215 

Resident,   British,   at   court   of 

Indian  native  states,  326 
Revenue,  sources  of,  142 
Rhodes,  Cecil,  308 
Rhodesia,  297 
Roads,  150 

Roberts,  Lord,  84,  n.,  85 
Roman  Catholics,  debarred  from 

throne,    99;    statistics    of, 

348,  notes  I  and  2 
Roosevelt,  Theodore,  321 
Rosebery,  Lord,  138,  139 
Rothschild,  Lord,  85 
Rural  District,  251 
Russell,  Lord  John,  48,  138 


Salary  of  members  of  Parliament, 
219 

Salisbury,  Lord,  135,  138,  139 

Sanitation,  150 

Schools,  349  et  seq. 

Scotland,  union  with  England, 
18;  suffrage,  34,  n.;  Secre- 
tary for,  131;  law  of,  206; 
appeals  to  House  of  Lords 
from,  206-207 ;  local  govern- 
ment in,  256;  women  in 
politics,  257;  church  in, 
348;  education  in,  353 

Seal,  Lord  Privy,  131;  Keeper  of 
the  Great,  132 

Secretary  for  Scotland,  131 

—  of  State  for  Colonies,  duties, 

270;  in  imperial  conferences, 
332 ;  otherwise  mentioned, 
131,  148 

—  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs, 

113-114,  131 

—  of  State  for  Home  Depart- 

ment, no,  131,  149,  153; 
authority  over  local  govern- 
ments, 248-249,  252 

—  of  State  for  India,  powers, 

etc.,  311-312;  Council  of, 
311;  otherwise  mentioned, 
131,  148 

—  of  State  for  War,  131,  144- 

145 

Senate,  Canadian,  287;  United 
States,  75  and  n.,  362-363 


Separation  of  departments,  15- 
16 

Sheriff,  American,  253 

Shipping  Controller,  146 

Short  ballot,  241 

Sinecures,  121-122,  134 

Solicitor-General,  121,  132,  155- 
156,  183;  for  Ireland,  132 

Solicitors,  205 

South  Africa,  drafting  «f  con- 
stitution, 282;  government, 
297  et  seq.;  Parliament  of; 
Governor-General  of;  Min- 
istry of,  297;  provinces  in; 
comparison  with  Canada 
and  Australia,  298-301; 
powers  of  Parliament  of,  301 

South  Carolina,  255,  n. 

Speaker  of  Commons,  37 ;  powers, 

74,  79 

Speech  from  throne,  57 
Spoils  system,  158-159,  241 
State  rights  in  Australia,  293' 
States,  Australian,  veto  of  laws 
of,    299;    appointment    of 
Governors  of,  300;   other- 
wise mentioned,  292,  293- 
294 

Statute  law,  189 
Statutory  orders,  116 
Steward,  Lord,  132 
Strathcona,  Lord,  85 
Suffragan  bishops,  342,  343 
Suffrage,  parliamentary,  33-34; 
in    Scotland    and    Ireland, 
257;      borough,  t  236-237; 
county,  246,  250;  in  London, 
260-261;  in  South  Africa, 
297  and  n.;  in  India,  318 
Sultan  of  Egypt,  327 
Summary  jurisdiction,  166-167 
Supreme  Court,  Australian,  293, 

294;  Canadian,  287,  288 
—  Court  of  Judicature,  201 
Switzerland,  5,  299 


Taft,  W.  H.,  66 
Tasmania,  292 
Taxes,  local,  252 
Tennyson,  Lord,  85 
Tithes,  338-339 


Index 


383 


Trade,     President     Board     of, 

131 

Treasury,  Lords  Commissioners 
of,  132;  department  of, 
138  et  seq.t  148.  See  also 
Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer 

Treaties,  113 

Turkey,  327 


Under-secretaries,  parliamen- 
tary, 121,  128,  131;  per- 
manent, 129 

United  States,  Constitution,  10; 
State  Constitutions,  281; 
Congress  compared  with 
Parliament,  51;  lack  of  co- 
operation of  executive  and 
legislature,  365-366;  parties 
in,  compared  with  parties  in 
England,  35~36,  215;  polit- 
ical customs  compared  with 
English,  219;  influence  of 
example  of  federal  form  of 
government,  298;  ditto  in 
Canada,  Australia,  and 
South  Africa,  283;  city 
government  in,  232,  235,  n., 
239;  local  government  in, 
compared  with  English, 
227-228,  243,  246-247;  lack 
of  proper  control  over  local 
government  in,  252-256; 
courts,  289;  judges,  184; 
juries,  196;  equity  and  law 
in,  192;  regulation  of  rail- 
roads, 151;  influence  of 
money  in,  85;  social  system, 
357»  36i;  democracy  of, 
compared  with  English, 
218-220;  democratic  and 
undemocratic  features,  361- 
363;  conflicts  of  American 
colonies  with  Crown,  307; 
government  compared  with 
English,  54-55,  65-66,  106, 
112,  156,  n.  Otherwise 
mentioned,  5,  7,  8,  9,  15. 
See  also  Congress,  Senate, 
etc. 

Universities,  members  of  Parlia- 


ment for,  30-31  and  n.  2; 
otherwise  mentioned,  351 
Urban  districts,  231,  250-251 


Veto,  royal,  22;  disappearance 
of,  108;  in  Crown  colonies, 
304,  306;  in  self-governing 
colonies,  302;  of  Canadian 
Governor-General,  284;  of 
provincial  acts  in  Canada, 
290;  of  Australian  Common- 
wealth acts,  293;  of  Austral- 
ian State  acts,  294,  299;  by 
Governor-General  of  India, 
313;  of  Governor-General 
or  British  government  over 
Indian  Provincial  Councils, 
318-319;  in  South  Africa, 
297 

Viceroy  of  India.  See  Gover- 
nor-General 

Victoria,  Queen,  48,  99 

Viscounts,  83 

Voting  in  Commons,  77-79. 
See  also  Suffrage 

W 

Wales,  disestablishment  inf 
341,  n.;  Episcopal  church 
in,  342,  n.;  religious  statis- 
tics, 348,  n.  I 

Walpole,  Robert,  133 

War,  Cabinet  during,  122-124; 
declaration  of,  114-115;  de- 
partment of,  144  et  seq.; 
the  Great  War  of  1914, 
effect  of,  on  India,  330-331; 
effect  of  ditto  on  imperial 
problems,  332-334 

Warden  of  the  Chiltern  Hund- 
reds, 79 

Washington,  George,  54,  366 

Wellington,  Lord,  85 

Westminster  Abbey,  18 

Whips,  76-78,  131-132 

William  the  Conqueror,  258 

—  III.,  100,  n. 

-IV.,  99 


384 


Index 


Wilson,  Woodrow,  54,  366 

Witenagemot,  81,  82 

Woman    suffrage,    in    England, 

250;  in  Scotland  and  Ireland, 

257;  in  Australia,  293 
Women,    as    political    workers, 

213-214;       on       Councils, 

237 


York,  province  of,  341;  Arch- 
bishop of,  342;  Convocation 
of,  343;  other  assemblies  of, 

Yorkshire,  167 
Yukon,  283,  n.,  291 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $I.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


JAN  12  1947 


(^ 


AJC1 


•& 


v— -  •: 


OCT  1 8  U6I 


LD  21-100m-12,  '43  (8796s) 


09041 


;  T 


o 

,-* 


W  a 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


